of such as the word is preached to their parents Or what other use serveth it to His fourth answer is that the administration of the Sacraments is also a duety of the ministry to be performed by a Pastor to more then the members of his particular Congregation c. Reply 1. Here againe I must continue and renew my complaint that the Answerer proveth not the power of the Classis in the particular in question 2. To admit those that are knowne members of another Church to communion in the Sacraments upon fitting occasions I hold lawfull and doe professe my readines to practise accordingly but is this any thing to those who refuse to joyne with any Church concerning whom and such like the question is Is the administration of the Sacrament a duety of the ministry to be performed by any Pastor to such If he say yea let him prove it If nay why then am I blamed for refusing it His fifth answer is ill bottomed upon a false supposition that the practise of the Church at Antioch in sending to the Church of Ierusalem warranteth Classes to excercise such authority over particular Churches as is now questioned Reply 1. I say it is ill bottomed For it will be hard for him to prove 1 that meeting to be Classicall which was but of 2 Churches consulting upon an extraordinary occasion in a difficult case 2. That this meeting consisted of Ministers onely seing the text sayth that at Antioch they gathered the Church Act 14.27 What was that the multitude Act 15.30 and at Ierusalem the Church Apostles and Elders are joyned together in receiving those messengers Where the Church againe signifyed the Multitude v. 12. who are also called the wholl Church and brethren v. 22. 23. 3. That those that dwelt at Ierusalem dealt in the case of those at Antioch by way of Classicall jurisdiction and authority seing Paul and Barnabas were sent who were not inferiour to the rest of the Apostles either in authority or in the infallible direction of the Holy Ghost and they were sent principally for the stopping of the mouths of those Seducers which pretended that they were sent by the Apostles as the Apostles intimate in their epistle to the Church at Antioch Act. 15.24 4. That the Classes have power to impose their decrees upon other Churches that have no delegates with them as the Apostles did at that time upon all the Churches of the Gentiles v. 23.28 Cap. 18.4 2. As his answer is ill bottomed so it is ill built unlesse he can prove that it is a part of every ministers office to be excercised in governing the members of many other Congregations as well as his one combined in Classes which he doeth not goe about to doe nor will be able out of Scripture where no such property of a minister is expressed either in the Acts or Epistles of the Apostles 3. As his answer is ill bottomed and ill built so is it ill added to prove the power of the Classes in the matter concerning which the question is which it doeth not prove at all His sixth answer wherein he pretendeth to come nearer to the place Act. 20.28 and so he had need to doe for hitherto he hath gone farr enough from it is that the flock is attended by the labour of the Pastor that it may be increased which is done by the labour of faithfull ministers seeking to bring those into the fold which at first are no members of the Church Reply 1. If all this were granted yet it will not conclude the point in question as will appeare to him that shall frame it into a Syllogisme 2. It may be questioned whether this drawing into the fold be the pastorall attendance there meant though I doubt not that it is lawfull and a duety but it seemeth not to be intended in that charge left with the Pastors of Ephesus 1. Because the worke of the Pastor qua talis is to feed a flock already gathered 1 Cor. 14.2 Ioh. 4.39 Act. 8.4 with Ch 11.19.20 21. Mat 18.19 Iames. 5.19.20 not to gather a flock unlesse by accident God casting in some to heare by a providence as that unlearned man that came in amongst them whilest they were prophesying or in some such like way though I doubt not it is a pious worke a bounden duety for a Pastor to labour the gayning of others 2. Because the labour of bringing in others into the fold hath bene undertaken by those that were not Pastors with blessed successe the Lord giving this glory to his owne word made effectuall by his spirit and not limiting it as a priviledge peculiar to any office in the Church And therefore even those out of office also are bound to labour in it His seaventh answer is that to assist a Church that is destitute of their Pastor in convincing erronious personâ— judicially in the Church is a duety and yet may be required of a neighbour minister Therefore men may excercise some acts of their ministry towards such as are no members of their Congregation Reply 1. Here againe somewhat is said but nothing to the point For will it follow that because a Minister may helpe a neighbour Church in convincing those that erre that therefore the Classes have a right to exact of me as a condition of my admittance to the pastorall office to baptise those infants whose parents are not under my pastorall charge 2. Though it be true that it is required of a Pastor to be able to convince erronious persons and that when he doeth it according to Christs order it is a part of his pastorall worke yet will it follow that wheresoever he excerciseth that ability he doeth execute a part of his pastorall office If not to what use serveth this discourse His eighth answer is that my profession of my readines to baptise their infants who are not members of this Church if I may be satisfyed that they have a right to it by their membership elsewhere in regard of the communion among particular Churches doeth plainly refute my selfe Reply 1. The thing that I question is the power of the Classis to bind me to such a condition 2. Suppose I had expresly denyed them to have this power as indeed I doe by consequence in the places of Scripture alleadged by me against it how doeth this profession plainely or darkely or at all refute that He sayth diverse wayes 1. Then it is an errour to thinck that a Pastor may not excercise his ministry in some acts of it toward those who are no members of his Church But I have already shewen that the question betweene us is not whether I may lawfully baptise such but by what right the Classis can exact it of me in the manner aforesaid How will he make good this inference Because it is not lawfull for the Classis to exact it in that manner therefore is it not lawfull to be done Or because he erreth that holds it not lawfull
Attersol not for promiscuous baptising 161. 27 Balmford Mr. Balmford defended 93. 34 Baptising Examples against promiscuous Baptising 32. 1 Arguments for promiscuous Baptising answered 118. 31 Scriptures for promiscuous Baptising answered 121. 31 The question cōcerning promiscuous Baptising stated 132. 5 Things premised about promiscuous Baptising 132. 22 Fower grounds against promiscuous Baptising 133. 25 The opinion of learned Writers concerning promiscuous Baptising 134. 1 The ends and uses of baptisme against promiscuous Baptising 140. 21. Promiscuous Baptising offensive 143. 19. Promiscuous Baptising amoung the Reformed a building of things destroyed 145. 21 Promiscuous Baptising against Godly custome 153. 9 Promiscuous Baptising not maintayned by them that seeme to favour it 156. 23 Pretences for promiscuous Baptising answered 163. 8 Promiscuous Baptising not an order of the Dutch Churches but a disorder crept in 175. 15 Confessions and Cannons of the Dutch Churches against promiscuous Baptising 175. 22 Custome about baptising such as that it may justly be called promiscuous Baptising 300. 34 Baptisme Baptisme is an ordinance belonging to the Church 312. 1 Basil Basil for peace sake remooves his dwelling 16. 31 Beza Beza not for promiscuous baptising 158. 19 Beza his opiniō of Synods 228. 11 Beza his carriage when Erastus his booke was published after the authors death 323. 27 Brownists Nearnesse to or distāce from the Brownists but a false rule to trie truth or errour by 10. 2 Brownists errours 280. 35 Burthen What a Burthen is 52. 36 The Burthen of the Complaynants being deprived of those whom they desired grievous by the concurrence of many respects 53. 6 Certainty Humaine Certainty stādeth with a contingency of future events 28. 10. Choosing Power of Choosing Ministers in the whole church 36. 24 the termes explicated 36. 30 the position layd downe as the Affrican Synod Professours of Leyden hold it 37. 8 Proofe of the position reduced to 3 heads 37. 23 Argumēt from the Scriptures 37. 25. Argument from consent of times 40 6. Argument from the evidence of reason 43. 10 Power of Choosing the Church cannot give from her 46. 12 Choyce In Choyce of Ministers there is in cases a necessary use of the combination of Churches 230. 33. Church In what sense Church is taken 36. 33. Church is deprived of her power two wayes 47. 35 Power to governe granted to the Church by witnesses in all ages 237. 21 The order of the Church of Franckford for the power of the Church 243. 13 What authority the Church hath about lawes 258. 10 Classis What the Classis requireth of Ministers which are to be ordained 68. 36 Two things blame worthie in the Classis 9. 12 The Classis repaired unto about the Replyers settling without his consent approbation 185. 34. The proceeding of the Classis after the Replyer had refused his call 193. 1 The Classis assume in some particulars more power then the the Prelates 223. 25 What power is due to Classis over particular Churches by vertue of combination 227. 19 The object of Classicall combinations of Churches 228. 7 Classis power borrowed derived from particular Churches 229. 3. Classis power not a prerogative of jurisdiction but of estimation 229. 27 Classis power not to deprive particular Churches of their power but to strengthen them in the exercise thereof 230. 10 Wherein the Classis power is undue and usurped 231. 26 The undue power of the Classis in making lawes 252. 26 Concerning resting in the determinations of the Classis 271. 14 Classis require more power then the Apostles when they required the Replyer to baptise those which were not members of the Church 287. 10 The Church of Antioch warranteth not the Classis 290. 32 Collection Concerning a Collection which the Answerer calls a recōpense of the Replyers labours 284. 2 Combination What kind of Combinatiō is lawfull among Churches 226. 11 The reasons of the lawfullnesse of Combinations 227. 3 Combinations of Churches in some cases expedient and necessary 230. 30 The Answerers Comforts are the Replyers also 34. 26 Complaynants Complaynants complaints no evill weedes 17. 31 Complaynants vindicated and the Answerer refuted 18. 6 Complaynants defended about their not advising with the Replyer 29. 1 Complaynants cleared of oppositiō unto the worthie servants of God 67. 24 Complaynants vindicated from slaunder in 8 particulars where in charged by the Answerer 88. 28. Complaynants assertions found true notwithstanding the answeres of the Answerer 209. 9 213. 26. Complaint What a Complaint is 3. 24 Complaints not unjust in themselves 3. 28 Fower things required unto an unjust Complaint 3. 29 Complaints of weake ones not to be sleighted 5. 23 Complaints of the Complaynāts unjustly called unjust 4. 10 Conference Conference betweene the Answerer and the Replyer defectively reported 117. 3 Confession Threefold Confession with the observations upon it in the protestation reviewed 18. 17 Contention Contention twofold good and bad 17. 36 Crispe Ia. Crispe vindicated from preaching wherewith the Ansvverer chargeth him 285. 17 Customes Of Customes the evillnesse of them and unlawfullnesse of building any practise upon them 30. 32 Good Customes should not lightly be broken 151. 25 Good Customes of a divers nature 152. 1 Denomination Denomination may follow the better part not the greater 21. 24 Difference Differences in opinion must in cases be borne with 58. 11 In cases of Difference there is necessary use of combination of Churches 231. 16 Elders Vsefullnesse and honnour of Elders 207. 31 Elders cleared from the charge of the Answerer about depriving the Church of her right 49. 15. Elders cleared from partiality 210. 34. Errour Errour ariseth frō the perversenesse of passions 63. 11 Errour in men one cause of harsh censuring of others 63. 29 Examples Examples in disquisition of truth not to be rested on 32. 8 Excommunication In Excommunication there may be good use of the combination of Churches 231. 8. Father What a Fathers duety is towards his children 20. 7 Fenner Mr. Fenners judgment about the power by which the Church should be governed 238. 25 against the Answerer 239. 29 Fleeing Fleeing justified by examples 104. 2. Fleeing not fearing them that can kill and not fainting may stand together 104. 23 Fleeing is sometimes a confessing to the truth 105. 14 Fleeing or a voluntary banishment is in some cases worse then some imprisonment 105. 13 Forbes Mr. Forbes defended 85. 32 commended 87. 30 Generall Generall good to be preferred 12. 32. Hooker Mr. Hooker defended 68. 25 Mr. Hooker not the cause of disturbance but the Answerer 116. 19. Mr. Hooker cleared frō Scisme 246. 1. Iacob Mr. Iacobs judgment about Classis and Synods for substance the same with Beza and Calvin 236. 4. Intentions It is lawfull to judge of mens Intentions 234. 1 Law Three things required to the making of a Law 256. 14 Lawes and orders differ 257. 30 Learned Learned mens judgements not sufficient to justify any thing or condemne it unlesse their grounds be found sufficiēt
are at rest as Mr. Parker Dr. Ames Mr. Forbes some are absent as Mr. Hooker Mr. Weld Mr. Peter 4. that he so interweaveth his discontents against the Elders the complaints of the members with the passages which concerne me that in many things I could not cleare my selfe without saying some thing also in their just defence which I have done sparingly and but when it was made necessary by his joyning us together 5. that he hath so frequently mentioned my name almost in every passage that I could not make a satisfying Reply on myne owne behalfe without examining almost the wholl booke which I was constrayned to doe also more particularly and according to the order of his Sections then else I would least it should be thought that I had bene unable to answer what I had praetermitted Wherein what I have written the Reader seeth but he knoweth not what I could have added and therefore is to be intreated to suspend his censure concerning what I have said till he may understand the reasons whereby I am able to justifye such particulars 6. that for the helpe of the Reader in comparing the Reply with the Answer I have inserted his owne words every where 7. that I thought it unaequall to cause the Reader to lay out his mony and spend his precious houres upon a fruitlesse discourse of our personall concernments onely and therefore have added many things upon this occasion for his intellectuall advantage whereby the Reply is made much larger then else it should have bene The benefit whereof will I hope with Gods blessing recompence his expence of mony or time upon it Which I beseech the Father of lights and of spirits to grant for the advancement of his truth in the hearts of many Amen The faults escaped correct thus 1. Words or points to be altered p stands for page l for line r. for read P 6. l 7. r. all together p 25. l 25. r operantis p. 32. l 6. r. Emden for Ments p 46. l 2. r. answereth p 48. l 27. r holesom l 37. r up p 54. l. 14. r injury p 55. l. 27. r consequence p 56. l 3. r open p 58. l. 27. r specially p 61. l. 2. r of for to p. 62. l. 1. and. p. 70. l 7. r 20. for 21. p. 79. l 23. r that the Doct p 81. l 26. r held p. 88. l 11. r in ter Veer where he p. 89. l 4. r with arrogating p. 118. l 29. r to the. p 148. l 5. r yet p 174. l 2. r counsail p 177. l 27. r was for w as p 191. l 33. r against it for against it p 223. l 12. r impute p 242. l. 2. r the for th p 245. l 7. r was for wae p 265 l 23. r. injustice p 266. l 20. r devised p. 268. l 7 8. r further p 288. l 31. r these p 295. l 4. r either for neither 2. Words or points to be added a stands for add p 9. l 20. a about after satisfactioÌ„ p. 59. l. 8. a. secondly before Is. p. 61. l. 16. a. not after p. 82. l. 1 a. he after fit p. 106. l. 19. a the before Iesuits p. 113. l. 15. r. moneths absence p. 163. l. 36. a. of marriages after condition p. 165. l. 14. a. after day p. 183 l. 17. r. ministers p. 202. l. 1. a. that after not p. 213. l. 14. r. constitution p. 229. l. 3. a. is after it 3. Words to be blotted out d stands for dele p. 9. l. 15. d. h in where p. 56 l. 13. d. First p. 66. in the margin d. s. in epist p. 82. l. 31. d. s in places p. 86. l. 31. d. s. in Maties p. 106. l. 19. d. the before Machiavells p. 138. l. 10. d. be Other faults which doe not so much hinder the Readers understanding I leave to his owne observation As when t is put for c s for c ei for i for e u for n p for b. s for f. m for n. n for m. y for i. c. A Table added by a Friend wherein the Reader for his better understanding is to take notice that the first figure sheweth the page the latter sheweth the line in the page Action CHristian actions of a twofold nature 277. 26 Ames Dr. Ames defended 77. 12 Commended 79. 12 What workes hee was author of 80. 1 His fitnesse for Pastorall office 81. 12 His remoove from Franeker to Rotterdam justified 83. 1 Dr. Ames not for promiscuous baptising 160. 14 Dr. Ames opinion of Synods 224. 36 Dr. Ames judgement about the power by which the Church ought to be governed 242. 20 Answer Three things required to a right answer of complaints 1 Two things required to a true answer 1 Answerer Answerer defective in his answer in the requisites thereto 2. 31 Answerers subtill devises to prejudice the Reader 7. 20 Answerers fallacie in putting that for a cause which is no cause 9. 25 Answerers judgement and practise agree not 12. 20 Answerer found faulty from his relation of a father 20. 6 from the place 20. 35 from the time 22. 10 Answerer found guilty of depriving the Church of those whom they desired notwithstanding all his answeres for the clearing of himselfe 55. 1 Answerer diverteth the Reader 51. 5. and 64. 19. and 68. 18. and 209. 30. Answerer prooved guilty of sinne in opposing the persons whom the Church desired 65. 8 It hath bene the Answerers course to injury the Church 77. 7 Answerer not willing to accommodate the Replyer about promiscuous baptising 126. 1. and 130 22. Answerer obtruded a false translation of the five Dutch Ministers writing upon the Reader 129. 12. Answerer contradicteth himselfe and the Classis about the insufficiency of the Elders about baptising 169. 12 Answerer hindreth the agreemeÌ„t of the Elders concerning the Replyers preaching notwithstanding all his pretended answeres 218. 12 Answerers needlesse jealousies kept Mr. Weld out from preaching when the Elders desired him 221. 27 Answerer notwithstanding his answeres found guilty of subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis 232. 22. Answerer joyneth with the enemies in an old cavill what the due power is by which the Church should be governed 253. 15. Answerer injurious to Christ and to the truth while hee thinkes to leave the complaynants under suspicion of adhearing to some sect 236. 22 Answerer found guilty of giving unto the Classis power to keepe out such men as the Church desired 243. 31 Answerer found guilty of giving unto the Classis power of making lawes 257. 7. Answerer found guilty of bringing matters violently unto the Classis 264. 9 Answerer found guilty of subjecting the Church under the Classis without consent â—68 1 Answerers answers about his pulpiting against the Replyer examined 278. 19 Answerer armes his opposites against himself and all Non-Conformists 282. 23 Answerer describeth not the persons right whose infants are brought to baptisme 314. 2 Attersol Mr.
to refuse those that are unworthy which very thing we see to descend upon them by Gods ordinance To which purpose also the Professours of Leyden distinguishing betweene Election and Ordination Synops pur Theol Disput 24 Sect. 32. 33. conclude that jus pastores eligendi est penes Ecclesiam ac proinde plebi commune cum presbyteris Ius eos ordinandi solis presbyteris est proprium c. The right of chusing their pastors is in the Church and therefore common to the people with the Elders The right of ordayning them is proper to the Elders Now that this Assertion may be vindicated from the reproach and suspition of Novelty or Singularity Proved 3. wayes 1. Text of Scripture 1. Act. 1.5 v. 23. I will reduce the proofes of it to three heads 1 Texts of Scripture 2 Consent of times 3 Evidence of Reason The first text is in Act 1 where at a meeting of about 120 persons the choyse of one to succeed in the place of Iudas being propounded by Peter the multitude pitched upon two men Ioseph surnamed lustus and Matthias whom they esteemed meetest for that worke v. 24.25 in reference to the description which Peter had before given of the man that might be judged fitt for that ministry having considered and concluded of two men whom they knew and judged to be such as best answered that description they commended them to God in prayer and because Apostles must be immediately called of God they gave forth lotts which fell upon Matthias whom thereupon they numbred with the eleven Apostles v. 26. Here are three Actors the Apostles calling upon the people to chuse and directing them therein according to the mind of Christ the people freely nominating those whom they judged fittest according to that direction and leaving that to the Lord which was peculiar and proper to him in such an extraordinary case to declare immediatly which of those two whom they had nominated it pleased him to sett apart to the Apostleship Hence I argue that The Apostles did not chuse Ioseph and Matthias alone but the wholl Church chose them by consent Therefore the choyse of the Minister belongeth not to some few how learned soever but to the wholl Church Ob. 1 What can be excepted against this Argument That the people did not chuse them Ans but desired God that he would chuse one But 1. so much as in that case could be left to the people the Lord left to them viz the nomination of two which was an inchoat choyse seing the full choyse must be made of God immediately the nature of that office so requiring 2. He substituted no other power under himselfe above the Church no not the Apostles themselves in that case What then Ob. 2 That this is an extraordinary case and toucheth not the calling of ordinary Pastors Ans But though the choyse by God immediately signified in the use of lots is extraordinary yet the suffrage of the people is ordinary Which seing God would not suffer to be neglected in such an extraordinary case much lesse will he dispense with the rejecting of it ordinarily 2. Act. 6.1 The second Text is Acts 6 where the multitude the number of Disciples being by this time increased and multiplyed are called together about the choyse of a Deacon In this buisenes the Apostles only directed them Vers 3. according to the mind of Christ what manner of one they should chuse leaving them to theyr liberty of chusing him whom they judged to be fittest for that service Vers 6. whom having chosen they presented him to the Apostles and they without gayn-saying having prayed layd theyr hands upon them Hence I argue in the words of the Affrican Synod in Cyprian thus Cypr. Epi. 68. If the Apostles would not chuse even Deacons without the consent of the people much lesse would they obtrude Pastors upon them without their consent For there are more greater causes that require the Churches consent in the choyse of Pastors then of Deacons The third Text is Act. 14 where it is sayd of Paul 3. Act. 14.23 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Barnabas that when they had by the suffrage of the people chosen Elders in every Church c. In which place some translatours in stead of chosen by consent read ordained 1. contrary to the use of the same word in another Scripture where themselves translate the same word in the passive particle chosen of the Churches 2. contrary to the consent of expositours upon that place 2. Cor. 8.19 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Calvin Beza Bullinger Musculus Brentius Arias Montanus Erasmus c. 3. contrary to the civill custom whence that word practise was brought into the Church it being taken from the custom of the Athenians in choyse of their Magistrates which they performed two wayes 1. By lots whence they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. By holding up of hands whence they were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. contrary to the nature of the thing Voet. desp caus pap lib. 2. Sect. 2. cap. 12. 1. Tim. 4.14 Cap. 5.22 for there election is spoken of which was done with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the holding up of hands not ordination which was afterwards done with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 laying on of hands as if election and ordination were one and the same thing whereas there is as much difference betweene them as is betweene the Election and Coronation of a King or the choyse installment of a Magistrate in his office This being granted that the people chose their Elders by consent hence I argue In the time of the Apostles the power of chusing was in the people without whose consent and preceding choyse the Apostles obtruded none upon them by they re owne Authority Therefore it ought to be so now This Argument when the authors of the admonition propounded D. Whitgift excepted against it saying that howsoever in the Apostles time this use was of having the consent of the Church in the choyse of their Pastor Cartw. Reply par p. 32. yet now it were pernicious and hurtfull To whom Mr. Cartwright replyeth breifely and fitly See how unaduisedly you condemne the Churches of Geneva of all France and certaine of the German Churches which keepe this order Idem ibid. p. 33.34.35.36 who also in the same place fully answereth the Archbishops five pretended differences betweene those times and these whereunto for brevityes sake I refer the Reader So much for the texts of Scripture 2. Consent of times The second proofe of the peoples right to choose their Pastor is from the consent of times First For the first three hundred yeares after Christ to Constantines time Ecclesiasticall hystoryes are cleare for it without contradiction The Ancients in the Affrican Synod in Cyprians time are expresse full in this point they in the Councell of Nice consent with them herein Cypr.
that may be well sayd quod volenti non fit injuria and that quilibet potest recedere a suo jure yet the cases must be such as wherein a man is not tyed to mainetaine his liberty with so strong a bond as the bond of reason nature of the rules of Christian aequity and of the freedom of the law of God It is free for a man not to eate or drinck this or that but not to eate or drinck at all and so to starve himselfe it is not free and in this case volenti fit injuria Husbands parents and masters have by the very instinct of nature and aequity of Christs law freedom to provide for those that depend upon them and so must carefully use this theire freedom may not wholly put from themselves the care of their provision education c. nor give theire consent to the making of any law or to the bringing in of any custom whereby theyr freedom should be restrained or annihilated in this point Thus farr he Now to prevent all mistakes it will be convenient to answer a question or two that may be propounded upon this occasion Quest 1 What if a Minister be put in by a patron without the choyse of the people going before may such a minister be thought to have a lawfull calling Ans Though that act of the patron be not sufficient to make him a lawfull Pastor to that people yet the after consent of the people Dr. Ames â—n 2. Manduct by acceptance and submission may make it good As in wedlock the after consent of parents or partyes doth often make that a lawfull state of marriage which before without that was none and in government acceptance and submission doth make him a King which before was an Usurper though in their order these actions be rather consequents then causes of that calling So it is betweene minister and people Quest 2 What if the Church neglect to call a Minister or desire and consent upon one that is unmeet either for doctrine or manners In such cases Ans Mr. Cartwr 1. Reply p. 35. the ministers and Elders of other Churches round about should advertise first and afterwards as occasion should serve sharpely and severely charge them that they neglect not this care of electing a fitt one and that they forbeare such election of one unfitt or if it be made that they confirme it not by suffering him to excercise any ministry And if either the Churches round about doe fayle of this duety or the Church which is admonished rest not in their admonition then to bring it to the next Synod and if it rest not therein then the Prince or Magistrate which must see that notbing in the Churches be disorderly and wickedly done aught to drive that Church from that election to another which is convenient Thus Mr. Cartwright So that in his judgement other Churches have no power of hindring a faulty election but by admonition which power every Christian hath in another for his good Nor can the Magistrate forbid the choyse which the Church hath made or would make unlesse the man upon whom they pitch be so unfitt either for doctrine or manners that the making of such a choyse will be wickedly and disorderly done Having thus declared what we hold de jure populi concerning the Churches right in the choyse of their Ministers Now we come to enquire de facto whether their complaint be just concerning the injury wherewith they charge the Answerer in this particular taking the rise of ensuing passages from those words wherein he mentioneth my name after a provoking manner in this Section I leave it to their consciences to consider Ans pag. 19.3 whether now also they would not have kept silence if they could have brought in Mr. D. even according to this corrupt order used by us as they complaine of it To prove that the Answerer doth not behave himselfe as becommeth a Pastor in governement their first evidence is Reply that he depriveth the Church of that liberty and power which Christ hath given it in the free choyse of their Pastor Now a Church is as well deprived of their liberty in chusing when the men â—â—ply whom they desire are without sufficient cause shewen to the Church kept out as when men are without their approbation obtruded upon them They complaine of both these injuries of the first in this and the following Section of the second in the sixth Section That in this Section they complaine of the first of these injuries appeareth by the instances which they produce for proofe of it in the fifth Section So then their complaint in this and the next Section is that they are deprived of the liberty and power of the free choyse of their Pastor which Christ hath given them in that they are deprived of worthy men whom they have generally desired but have bene hindered that either they could not chuse them or having chosen could not injoy them and this hath bene done against them without sufficient cause alleadged against the men whom they have desired And the person whom they particularly charge with this unjury is the Answerer Let us now consider how he doth defend himselfe And this he endeavoureth to doe diverse wayes Pag. 18. Ans 1. First by putting the blame from himselfe upon the Classis and not upon their persons so much as upon the very government established in these Churches 1. Reply 1. Here it must be remembred that the Complainants produce the holy records of the ancient charter of priviledges which of old was granted unto particular Churches in this case Pag. 19. Ans 4 which also the Answerer himselfe coÌ„fesseth so clearely to warrant their claime and to justifye this plea that he hath as he sayth both publickly taught in the exposition of those 2 places Acts. 6.3 and 14.23 and doth still acknowledge that the free consent of the people is required to the lawfull calling of a Minister and afterwards he sayth Pag. 22. Ans 8. that to deprive the Church of that liberty power c. must be an heynous crime and no lesse then Sacriledge This crime how great soever it is the Reader will find that he chargeth upon the Classis how justly let him see nor will he be able to cleare himselfe of slandring the very government and order of discipline established in these Churches unlesse he can shew out of the Nationall Synods that it was established for an order in these Countryes that the Classes should have power to deprive the Churches of the Ministers whom they desire or have chosen without shewing sufficient cause for the Churches satisfaction which is the greivance complained of by these subâ—â—ibers 2. If it be not true of them the more heynous the accusation is the more greivous the slander is and so much the more greivous in him who is many wayes obliged to them and whose testimony against them will be
he slandereth me before No marvell if diverse learned and godly Ministers being they re neighbours in this country have bene loath to shew themselves in this place c. least they should seeme to offer themselves unto this calling For they knew the Answerers disposition and spirit and the contentions which have thereby bene in this place which if I had knowne so as now I doe no perswasions should have drawne me thither And it is very likely that I had stayed at Rotterdam till the Eldership had sent for me as Mr. H. did if the necessity of the place had not hurryed me sooner to prevent the shutting up of the Church dores which as I have bene told and the event shewed would come to passe the next Lords day if my comming prevented it not Yet two of the Elders with some other members of the Congregation met me at Harlem and accompanied me to Amsterdam tooke care for my accomodation with a convenient intertaynment and the joy that was generally expressed soone after my being there was knowne shewed a great desire in the members that they might injoy me And the Answerer himselfe at that time acknowledged Gods good providence in my being there at that time and joyntly with the Elders who were then present when I first visited him intreated my helpe the Lords day following and so long as my time would permit and they re need should require To the second praesumption that they that sent for me and I. C. that fetched me over did not seeke me but for 3 or 4 moneths J answer 1. Suppose theyr desire was to injoy me longer will it thence follow that I yeelded for longer time 2. By what hath bene formerly said it appeareth sufficiently that I agreed with him for no longer time which himselfe is able and ready to testifye if it be required To the third praesumption that the freind which by an open and unsealed letter which I brought unto him from London intreated him to receive me for a fellow helper did not desire that for 3 or 4 moneths only Answer I thinck never did Laban search so narrowly Iacobs stuff to find his Idolls as this Answerer doeth to find an untrueth in my assertion To what end is this brought in If he thinck or would perswade others that I procured that freinds letter that I might obtaine the place he is much deceived For neither stands it with my judgment to seeke a place much lesse by such private recommendations nor need I the letters of any private freind having a more publick testimony And how litle I minded that letter may appeare in this that I know not that it was unsealed and if indeed it was unsealed I know not at all what was written in it It is likely that knowing the authour of it to be my approved freind and one that hath deserved well of the Answerer I supposed he would commend me to him affectionately to be lovingly intertayned used by him in a strange Country and so tooke no further heed to it But what if that freind did intreate him to receive me for a fellowhelper Will it follow thence that I saught it who seeth not the vanity of these pretences To the fourth praesumption That it was not likely that after 3 or 4 moneths preaching amongst them I could easily be dismissed and they re labour and care of seeking and calling another must be interruped if not wholly broken off Answer 1. Grant all this to be true will it thence follow that I saught it 2. Grant that at the end of 3 or 4 moneths I had accepted of a call to that place which it is probable I should have done if it had bene offered upon safe conditions rather then to live without publick imployment will it thence follow that I inordinately desired or basely or unworthily saught it or unwarrantably or without a calling intruded my selfe 3. what hindrance could my mere preaching there be to they re seeking or calling another if I should refuse it Let the indifferent Iudge To what he sayth in the two following answers about the necessity of my knowing the state of the Dutch Churches whet her I stayed here or not I Answer that even for that Reason my comming over was needfull For no mans word or letters could make that so well knowne to me as myne owne observation experience hath done But the suppositiō whereupon he groundeth that opinion I doe not approve For in some cases a good conscience suffers a man to be neutrall viz in those things which he is not bound to know or practise wherein he hath wanted occasiō or meanes of full informatiō And what hurt can that man be supposed to doe by private conference who suspendeth his judgment and determineth neyther way Are not these passages mere roapes of sand Lastly Whereas he seemeth to doubt in the beginning of this Section whether I came not over with a discordant mind I professe in simplicity of my heart that I came over with a reverent esteeme of him and with confidence that I should reape more fruits of his brotherly love then I have received and was farr from any purpose of raysing contention which I naturally abhorr or suspition that I should have met with such contentions as I have bene troubled with which if I had foreseene J should never have come to Amsterdam Yet I doe not repine at but contentedly submit to that good hand of Divine providence which brought me hither and is pleased this way to trye me and doe with a childelike submission and reverence in my measure kisse the rod in my Fathers hand even when I lament the unkindnes of my Elder brother which yet I would not have published if he would have suffered me to be silent The Answer to the eleventh Section examined Of the private conference had with me after my comming over IN this Section three things are to be considered 1. his gird at Mr. Hook 2. His partiall and defective report of a conference betweene us 3. his pretended answer to some passages in my third wrighting These we will examine severally and breifely For the first 1. the great disturbance which here he seemeth to impute to Mr. Hook is to be charged upon himselfe and his owne violent and unjust opposition against Mr. Hook and the Church and not at all to Mr. Hook unles by accident as Paul might be said to be an occasion of the disturbance at Ephesus Ast. 19.22 the cause whereof was Demetrius his companions 2. It would be knowne how I seemed to accord with him and to dislike Mr. Hook opinions in generall If he meane by my my silence I confesse I heard him speake some things at which I was silent being not called to speake For himselfe said that in some of their differences he would not inquire after my opinion being perswaded that I was therein cleare And in conclusion pitched upon two questions 1. Concerning the power and
appoyntment of the rest one of them translated it into latine which was sent to me and now is by him out of latine translated into English Now that the Reader may see how much he is abused by this false translation of that wrighting I will publish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very wrighting it selfe verbatim without alteration of a syllable as I received it from them and then compare this translation with it The Latine copy word for word Nos infra-scripti Pastores Ecclesiae Belgicae in civitate Amsteldamensi a viro Reverendo D. Pageto fideli pastore in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ ejusdem civitatis nec non a venerandis fratribus Senioribus ac Diaconis ejusdem Ecclesiae Anglicanae specialiter requisiti ac fraternè rogati ut privatum nostrum judicium in causa vocationis quae ab universâ Ecclesiâ praedictâ videtur expeti Reverendi Clarissimi Doctissimique viri D. DAVENPORTII sincerè declarare atque exponere non recusemus idque in casu illo unico particulari spectante Baptismum eorum infantium qui in Ecclesiâ Anglicanâ baptizandi offeruntur Re totâ utrinque benè intellectâ ritè perpensâ et ad normam Verbi Dei ordinemque receptum in Ecclesijs Reformatis harum Provinciarum in quibus praedicta Ecclesia Anglicana sese membrum profiretur sub Classe Amsteldamensi probè examinatâ sincerè ac coram Deo in bonâ conscientiâ responsum damus atque declaramus Nihil magis nobis in votis esse quam ut praedictus D. Davenportius cujus insignis eruditio et singularis pietas ab omnibus fratribus Anglicanis apprime probatur laudaturque quemque hoc ipso nomine nec non ob alias virtutes ejus laudabiles etiam ipsi D. Pageto charissimum esse intelligimus ad ministerium Ecclesiae Anglicanae praedictae legitime promoveatur Bonum insuper ipsius Zelum ac studium de parentum ac susccptorum istorum liberorum praeuiô aliquô examine privatô in religione Christianâ instituendô quam maximè quidem nobis probari de re ipsâ tamen ita nos statuere ut praedictum illud examen quantum Ecclesiae Anglicanae feret aedificatio instituatur sed si fortè vel parentes susceptoresve istud accedere ac subire renuant vel ob temporis brevitatem aut alijs justis de causis fieri illud non queat vel etiam qui accesserint fratris vel fratrum examinantium judicio non videbuntur pro isto tempore satisfacere ipse infans cujus parentes susceptoresve constat esse Christianos quique Christianam religionem ad lectionem liturgiae Sacramenti Baptismi publicè coram Ecclesia profitentur a Baptismo propterea minime arceatur aut baptizarì recusetur sed ut ejusmodi ignorantes parentes susceptoresve post infantem baptizatum ulterÄus postea quoad fieri potest edoceantur quoniam scilicet infantes Christianorum suorum parentum susceptorumve vel inscitiam vel etiam ejusmodi inobedientiam ferre ac luere non debent Si quis tamen casus ullus alius obveniat quo minus infans oblatus baptizandus videatur ut tum totius presbyterij Anglicani vel etiam si necesse fuerit aut commodè fieri possit Classis Amsteldamensis judicium interveniat audiatur atque in eo acquiescatur Sic actum et transactum in aedibus D. Pageti Die 20. Ianuarij 1634. Ioannes le Mairius Iacobus Triglandius Henricus Geldorpius Rudolphus Petri. Iacobus Laurentius 2. The translation word for word We the underwritten Ministers of the Dutch Church in the citty of Amsterdam being specially and lovingly requested and desired of the Reverend Mr. PAGET a faithfull Pastour iâ— the English Church of the same city as also the the Reverend brethren the Elders and Deacons of the same English Church that we would not refuse sincerely to declare shew our private judgment about the calling of the Reverend most famous learned Mr. DAVENPORT which seemes to be desired of the whole Church aforesaid and that in this particular case alone concerning the Baptisme of those infants which are offered to be baptised in the English Church having well understood and duely weighed the whole matter on both sides and having throughly examined it according to the rule of Gods word and the order received in the Reformed Churches of these Provinces in which the aforesaid English Church doth professe it selfe a member under the Classis of Amsterdam we doe sincerely and in the presence of God with good conscience answer and declare that we desire nothing more then that the foresaid Mr. DAVENPORT whose notable learning and singular piety is much approoved and commended of all the English our brethren whom also in this regard and for his other commendable gifts we understand to be most deare unto Mr. PAGET may be lawfully promoted unto the Ministry of the English Church aforesaid we doe also greatly approove of his good Zeale and care of having some precedent private examination of the parents and sureties of these children in the Christian Religion yet touching the matter it selfe we doe so judge that this aforesaid examination be ordained so farr as may stand with the edification of the English Church but if haply the parents or sureties shall refuse to come and undergoe this examination or if for the shortnes of time or for other just causes it can not be done or if those that doe come shall not seeme for that time to satisfye the judgment of the Brethren one or more that doe examine them that yet the infant whose pareÌ„ts sureties are manifest to be ChristiaÌ„s which publickly before the Church doe professe Christian Religion at the reading of the leiturgie of the Sacrament of Baptisme shall not therefore be excluded or deprived thereof but that such ignorant pareÌ„ts sureties be further instructed after the infaÌ„t be baptised to wit because the infaÌ„ts of ChristiaÌ„s ought not to beare suffer the punishmeÌ„t of the ignorance or yet of such disobedience of their pareÌ„ts or sureties If yet any other case fall-out whereby it may seeme that the infant presented should not be baptised that then the judgment of the whole English Presbytery or also if need be and if conveniently it may be done that the judgment of the Classis of Amsterdam be obtayned and rested in So was it done and transacted in the house of Mr. PAGET the 28. day of Ianuary 1634. Here it must be noated that the Answerer pretendeth to publish this wrighting 1. So as it was done and transacted in his house the 28. day of Ianuary 1634. 2. So as it was written downe and read before him when they enquired of him whether he for his part did rest therein and he signifyed his consent with them These things being premised J demand by what pretence will the Answerer defend or excuse this his translation Let me without offence desire to know why he hath translated quorum parentes susceptoresve constat esse Christianos whose parents and suretyes are
it is not safe vllius jurare in verba magistri to rest upon the authority of any man without a warrant from the Scripture Secondly Compare what was alleadged out of Beza himselfe in my 1. Reason in this Section with this passage and what Mr Cartwright answereth to some part of this in the same Section the Reader will see that it may easily be declared that this sentence will not helpe the Advocates for promiscuous baptizing Thirdly Consider the state of the question as Beza maketh it and it will appeare that the infants for whose Baptisme he pleadeth are of such as we may rationally judge to be ingrafted into Christ and elect of God only being fallen by infirmity are delivered unto Sathan that godly sorrow may worke in them repentance But what is this for the justifying of a promiscuous administration of Baptisme to all that are offered in such a place as Amsterdam concerning many of whom we can not rationally have any such persuasion Fourthly The foure things supposed by Beza as cases wherein he dare not give liberty of baptising serve to discover the evill of this custom whereunto that wrighting would have bound me For if all that are presented though they refuse to make knowne before who or what they are must be received may not the infāts of many whose case is desperate in the judgment of the Church who are not only Apostates from it but persecutors yea even the children of Iewes Mores and others such like without the parents consent be offered to baptisme and so be baptised which were to profane the Sacrament 2. Observe how timerously Beza expresseth himselfe about the parents on whom the right of the infant to baptisme dependeth in this case whereby it may seeme that he was not fully cleare in it himselfe Fifthly The cautions and provisoes which Beza giveth to be observed in the baptising of such children of excommunicates as he there speaketh of doe strongly condemne the disorder of that place where the father is so farr from being admonished publickly of his sinne that he is not so much as knowne or inquired after and where they are so farr from taking care for the holy education of the child that they regard not by whom it is presented nor what becommeth of it afterwards 2. De consc lib. 4. cap. 27. Secondly Dr. Ames commeth next to be considered and a passage in his booke of cases to be examined least some ignorantly others willfully wrest it to the countenancing of this disorder which to be farr from his meaning himselfe doeth abundantly declare in the same place For he so expresseth his opinion concerning the baptisme of diverse sorts of infants there mentioned as it may appeare that his judgment was against promiscuous baptising all that are brought according to the controverted custom which I demonstrate thus Resp 2 First he requireth 2. things in such infants as necessary to their admittance 1. That they be in the covenant of Grace in respect of outward profession and aestimation at least in one of the parents 2. That there is hope that they shall hereafter be educated und instructed in the same covenant Both which he affirmeth upon the same ground which we layd in the first Reason viz Because Baptisme is a signe and seale of the covenant But how can they be esteemed Christian parents or what hope can there be of the education of such infants in the covenant when both the parents sureties are altogether unknowne to the Church and that in such a place as Amsterdam where is such a confluence of people of all nations and Sects Resp 3 Secondly He affirmeth that Baptisme doeth most properly belong to those infants whose parents at least one of them is in the Church not out of it And this he affirmeth upon the former ground viz Because Baptisme is the seale of the covenant But who knoweth not that many people are in Amsterdam who are not in the Church but out of it in many respects yet none must be refused that are presented to Baptisme Thirdly He supposeth that those whose parents are unknowne are in charity to be accounted Christians when there is not just cause of presuming the contrary But howsoever this might carry some shew of reason with it in such places where all the inhabitants professe religion and are joyned to some Church yet in such a place as Amsterdam how can a man presume otherwise then the contrary of many that may be offered to Baptisme Fourthly He professeth that a difference must be put betweene the infants of those who in some sort by profession belong to the Church yet doe openly breake the covenant of God and the children of others in the manner of their admittance to Baptisme viz that for the former sort what is required by the Covenant and wanting in them must be supplyed by others And for this he giveth two Reasons 1. Because a distinction must be observed in all holy things betweene the cleane and uncleane 2. Because else the ordinances of God cannot be preserved from all pollution For these reasons he doeth not allow the Baptisme of excommunicates unlesse they have fit suretyes to undertake for their education nor of bastards unlesse their parents have professed their repentance or other godly persons will take upon them the care of their education nor of papists unlesse they be presented by fit suretyes who have power over thē for theire education But is any such care taken any such course observed about the admission of such to Baptisme in Amsterdam Thirdly Mr. Attersoll shall shut up this discourse of times Of the Sacram of Bapt. 2. booke ch 6 whom the Reader may suspect to favour this custom if something be not noated by us to prevent mistakes Now howsoever he may seeme to be some what large in his judgement this way and to yeeld more then either Mr. Beza or Dr. Ames have done in this point it may be more then himselfe would have done if he had fully understood the disorder against which we testifye yet the limitations and cautions which he propoundeth doe discover the evill of that practise concerning which the present question is P. 218 For 1. he denyeth that the infants of Turkes or Iewes may be baptised against the liking and good will of their parents But it is very possible and probable that some such may be offered to Baptisme by any that have stollē them or for some other reason for ought the minister knoweth or demandeth in that place P. 219. 2. In the case of the children of impaenitent persons he supposeth two things without which his plea for their Baptisme falleth 1. That they are so borne in the Church and of it that the Church may be said to be as it were their Mother 2. That they are in the Covenant in regard of their Elders of whom they discend as the Iewes were in Abraham though their next parents were wicked P.
his call to a pastorall charge 2. Because the five Ministers propounded their private judgment nakedly without shewing their grounds from the Scripture so that they seemed to me to deale by their authority not by argument Now the mere authority that is the bare affirmation of godly and learned men is lesse to be regarded then their reasons and yet their reasons without the word are of no value in Divine matters For all men are lyars apt to be deceived and so to deceive impossibility of erring being proper to the Scriptures which therefore are only fit to be the Canon or rule for the ordering of Ministers concerning their wholl behaviour in the house of God 1. Tim. 3.14.15 Mat. 21.13 Mat. 12.3 Hence Christ and his Apostles 1. reproved disorders by Scripture so Christ did the profaning of the Temple 2 justified things well done by Scripture so Christ did the pulling of the eares of corne 3. resolved answered questions by Scripture so Christ did Mat. 19.4 Mat. 15.4 Mat. 22.29.32 Acts. 2.1.34 Act. 15. in the case of Divorce 4. confuted errours by Scriptures so Christ did the Pharisees and Sadduces 5. confirmed and proved Doctrines by Scriptures so Peter proved the resurrection and ascention of Christ c. 6. gave advice and made orders not by their owne authority but by the direction of the Holy Ghoast which immediate assistance seing we want light must be fetched from Scripture if we will guide others safely by our counsayle without which learned men may erre have erred and doe erre therefore their judgments must be tryed and judged by it and no further be rested in then they agree with it According to that of Ierom Quod ex Scripturâ non habet authoritatem câadem facilitate contemnitur quâ acceptatur Hieron in Math. 23. That which hath not authority from the Scripture is as easily despised as received Seaventh pretence It is the custom of these Churches which all 7. Pretence that are admitted by the Classis doe promise to observe This pretence the Answerer insinuateth in that which he sayd about the forme of Mr. B. calling Ans which was to minister the word and the dependances thereof according to the order of these Reformed Churches and especially with these which are combined with the Classis of Amsterdam Concerning that expression some thing more may be noated in the examination of the seventeenth Section and when we come to the eight and twentith Section For the present Reply we will oppose besides all considerations which have bene formerly alleadged or may be heareafter two things to this custom to prove that this cannot be the order of these Reformed Churches but must be only a disorder crept in and prevayling by mens ossitancie and sleepines which is Sathans best opportunity for the sowing of tares which I shall demonstrate thus First oppose the Confessions of the Reformed Churches to this custom Ham. Confess Sect. 13. and it will be found that they cannot stand together for when they described qui sunt baptisandi who are to be baptised speaking of infants they say they must be the children of persons that are in the Covenant (a) Helvet poster cap. 13. of the people of God (b) Helvet prior art 21. et Bohem c. 21. of holy parents (c) Gallic Art 35. of those to whom the promises belong (d) Belgic Art 34. who are inserted into the Church and only them (e) Saxon confess Art 13. the true children of Abraham (f) Suevit cap. 17. such as are in alike condition as they were who had right to Circumcision amongst the Iewes Now compare with this doctrine of the Reformed Churches the practise of that place as it hath bene declared and it will appeare that their owne Confessions plead against this custom And how can that be called the order of these Reformed Churches which agreeth not with the doctrine of these reformed Churches Secondly oppose the Canons of the Synods of these countryes to this custom and the thing will be manifested In a Synod held at Dort in the yeare 1578. Art 59. It was referred to the judgment of the Ministers and Elders whether there be any lawfull cause brought by any why the child to be baptised should be deferred from Baptisme and in Art 61. It was ordered that the fathers before they bring their children to baptisme shall goe to the Minister or an Elder that the Church may have notice of the partyes that are to be baptised And in Art 62. They are appoynted to acquaint the Minister what name they will give the child and to shew him how they will educate the child in that Religion In a Synod held at Middleborough in the yeare 1581. the 22. question It is demanded whether the parents of children doe goe first to the Minister or Elders and certify them that they desire to have their children baptised before to see whether they judge it meet to receive such witnesses or not In Art 75. It is questioned whether the Minister should be rebuked when he baptiseth children whose parents appoynt witnesses which stand not for religion Ans The parents shall be wonted as much as is possible that they first speake with the Ministers before they present their children to baptisme c. In a Synod held at Vtricht in the yeare 1590. Art 1. It is decreed that Baptisme is to be administred according to the ordinance of Christ without Godfathers to bind themselves only the father and mother to promise to trayne it up in the Religion Now compare the Canons of these Synods with the custom of that place and they will be found so farr to varye from it that it will appeare not to be the order of these reformed Churches but a disorder crept in as we have said before I will conclude this examination of pretences used in defence of this unwarrantable custom with the judicious censure of Dr. Ames who knew well the miscarriage of this disorder in these countryes De conscientia Cap. 27.4 Incuria illa idcirco neutiquam potest excusari quâ promiscuè sine disermine admittuntur quicunque et a quibuscunque offeruntur Therefore that carelesnes can by no means be excused whereby all promiscuously and without difference are admitted to baptisme by whomsoever they are presented And so much shall suffice for the examination of the twelfth Section and for declaration of the grounds whereupon I durst not bind my selfe by promise or otherwise to rest in the judgment of those five Ministers that is to conforme to the custom of this place in administring Baptisme promiscuously to all that are presensed and by whomsoever The Answer to the 13. Section examined Of the order agreed upon in the Consistory THat which here he calleth an order will upon examination be found very farr from accommodating me I will wright it downe as I received it from the Elders out of the noate which I have in
keeping Ian. 19. 1634. The Consistory being gathered Elders and Deacons together it was demanded whether that all persons being no members should be sent unto Mr. D. to desire the baptisme of their children and to make confession to him for his satisfaction in his administration of that Sacrament The answer was by all voyces yea if Mr. D. can be persuaded thereunto And for the better and more convenient bringing of the parents or presenters of the children to the Minister it is agreed by most voyces in Consistory that Th A. the Coster shall bring or direct the partyes to the Ministers house Afterward this question was propounded by the Answerer written downe in these words Whether if persons ignorant being willing to receive instruction allthough not presently able to render a reason shall be sent away by him or admitted to witt they approving of the doctrine of baptisme taught in these Churches and as by us usually is propounded A Copy of this pretended order with the questionw as brought to me by some of the Elders to see what answer J would make to them boath Which when I had considered I found the order too short and the question captious First for the order J let these five things be duely weighed 1. The Answerer dateth this order Ian. 15. which the Elders date Ian 19. as he dated the ministers wrighting to me Ian 28. which themselves in their latine copy to me dated Ian 20. which difference is not of much consequence only it sheweth that it is not safe for the Reader to be too confident of the Answerers memory 2. Where as I propounded three wayes of accommodation as the eleventh Section sheweth here is but one of them propounded in the Consistory 3. That one is otherwise propounded then I expressed it For I did not desire that all whose children should be presented to baptisme should be sent to me but only that it should be so when it fell into my course to administer that Sacrament my motion being that we might not performe it joyntly but severally and alternis vicibus neither did I require that they should make confession to me but that I might speake with them before they presented them in publick that I might have some knowledge of them by private conference with them to prevent publick disturbance 4. The course whereupon they agreed for accommodation was not sufficient For 1. many present their children to Baptisme that acquaint not Th. A. with it before hand The Answerer told me that they come many times in the sermon time no man having knowledge thereof before How shall Tho A. send such to me 2. They that doe acquaint him with their purpose of presenting their children what if they will not come to me upon his persuasion Who seeth not that I am in such cases and the like as farr to seeke for accommodation as if no order had bene made I told the Elders that this would not be sufficient unlesse it were added that no infants should be presented in publick to baptisme whose parents are not members of the Church before the minister had received satisfaction concerning the parents in private To this purpose I required that a firme order should be made in the Consistory to secure me from further trouble about this point which the Elders promised and indeavoured to effect as I was told but the Answerer resisted it refusing his consent thereunto without the consent of the Classis 5. The offer which he pretended that he voluntarily made for the inlarging of this order and my further accommodation to wit that he would send to me those parents that should come to him c. and so departing from his right he was content to referr the wholl worke of examination to my discretion is a vaine boast of false liberality For. 1. few if any come to him to advertise him thereof 2. If he should speake to them they would chuse and it may be refuse and make contention if a firme order were not made to prevent it 3. His referring of the wholl worke of examination to me was cast in for a pretence to evade the first meane of accommodation propounded by me and by the second course Sect. 11. which J propounded for accommodation also it may appeare that this offer was not for the accommodation which I desired but to hinder it rather Secondly for the question Any one may see it was captious For. 1. Why doeth he speake only of knowledge when I would as he knoweth be satisfyed concerning other things as well as their knowledge 2. Why doeth he speake of the measure and degree of knowledge so obscurely and suspiciously 3. Why was this question added to the order Was it not to shew that the order should no further stand then he received satisfaction in my answer to his question And hereby two things are manifested 1. that the order was not absolute but conitionall if I could be persuaded thereunto 2. that I did not approve of this order as sufficient as may further appeare in my dislike of his question whereunto if my answer had bene to his content to what end did he procure the five Ministers to signe that wrighting which was sent to me afterwards as him selfe confesseth in the beginning of this Section It had bene superfluous and to no purpose if the matter had bene before concluded amongst our selves For a Conclusion of this Section to satisfye the Reader that this was to be called rather a proposition or motion about an order to be deliberated upon then an order perfected by mature deliberation these Considerations may be added to what hath bene said 1. That with this pretended order a question was joyned and my answer to boath was required This sheweth that the order was not absolute but to be assented to by the Answerer if my answer to his question should please him 2. That in that order it is expresly sayd yea if Mr. D. can be intreated c. which againe sheweth that it was no absolute order but to stand if I could be intreated c. So that this could not be called an order till the Answerer had bene satisfyed about myne answer to his question and till I had yeelded to what by this order should be propounded to me 3. That when the order was brought to me though the word satisfaction and content was spoken of by me as a word fit to be in the order yet I demanded how this could be done by that order upon the reasons before mentioned in my fifth proofe of the defectivenes of that order 4. That upon my mislike of it the order was left with me to peruse and to add what I thought requisite as it was fit it should seing the end of it was my satisfaction 5. That before J had polished and perfected that order to my content the letter of the five Ministers was brought to me which then put me out of hope till the Elders againe promised me
purpose if any should at unawares bring such children whose parents are not members we shall desire and counsaile them by the Coster without absolute denyall to bring their children the next excercise following that in the meane time there may be conveniency of examination Vpon which Additionall I will noate some observations 1. That the Elders and Deacons did in effect revoke that testification which was last spoken of For by their adding of this to what was then done it appeared that themselves saw that the former order was not sufficient to safeguard me from the thing that I feared 2. That this Additionall is onely a declaration of their purpose but hath not the force of an order 3. That considering that they purposed onely to signifye so much privately to those persons who should at anytime so come and not to have it published that the wholl Church might take knowledge of it and that by the Coster a meane man whom they to whom he should speake would easily slight and his commission was only to desire and counsaile them which they would easily reject and aske him what he had to doe to counsaile them to deferr the baptising of their children In this case what could he answer but this J doe onely desire and counsail you but I may not absolutely deny you And how can such a course secure me Here againe the Answerer misreporteth my answer for he affirmeth that this would not content me unlesse there might have benean absolute denyall of Baptisme in such a case if intreaty would not serve But I made no such Answer neither is any such answer recorded in the Acts of that Consistory which I have purposely examined All that I stoode upon was that a firme order might be made in the Consistory to secure me from future trouble about that matter But this the Answerer would not permit to be done though it might have bene done without any offence to the Classis and with much content to the Church So that I have just cause to complaine of his want of brotherly moderation in this point what soever he seemed to yeeld which he knew was not sufficient to prevent the thing which I feared The following passage is an unjust reproach which I will passe by having answered to the substance of it formerly How unlawfull that practise is and how necessary it was that I should witnesse against it doth appeare in my Reply to his twelfth Section In Conclusion when the Elders prayed me to deferr my answer to another time the Answerer told me that when I should give myne answer if I did accept of this calling I must promise to rest in that is to conforme to the wrighting of the five Ministers Whereby it appeareth that not withstanding all these pretences of accommodation conformity to that wrighting which bound me to this disorder of promiscuous baptizing was first and last the condition whereupon my calling to that ministry must stand or fall and that the Answerer would have it so Thus that day passed Now though I had just cause of offence at these passages yet that it might appeare how much I was for peace and brotherly concord the next day of their meeting being the 15 of Feb. I came into the Consistory to give my answer which was that if a promise must be made by me to conforme to the judgment of those Ministers set downe as an order for me to rest in I could not doe it because the promise of doing any thing is a Confessiō that the thing is lawfull to be done which I doe not beleive to be so in this case yet because I much prized their loves and tendred their peace as I truely told them I was willing if they desired it to goe on in assisting the Answerer as I formerly had done for a convenient time to see if in the interim by a freindly acquainting my selfe with the Dutch Ministers I might be satisfyed about the lawfullnes of this custom whereunto my conformity was required or procure that this questiō might be layd downe might understand what those other orders customs of the Dutch Church are which I must observe more fully know the mēbers state of the English Church wherwith I should joyne In which motion I intended no intrusion which I have alwayes abhorred and was very farr from in that place but onely the peace and good of the Church This the Elders apprehended to be very reasonable desired that it might take effect but the Answerer was otherwise minded as it is in expresse words by the Elders recorded in the Acts of that Consistory His Answer to the 19. Section examined containing certaine Acts of the Classis after that my dissent and refusall of the call was knowne IN this Section we have the story of passages concerning this buisenes in three Classes and with the Magistrates But before I examine them it may be demanded why this matter was brought into the Classis seing I had in the Consistory declared my not accepting the call which was offered me upon those termes was it because the Consistory had not power to give me a convenient time for informing my selfe concerning the orders customs of the Dutch Church by consent amongst themselves without seeking to the Classis But I come to the particulars Concerning the first Classicall meeting fowre things are reported 1. their dislike of my change 2. Feb. 27. 28. 1634. their approbation of the five ministers wrighting 3. the deputation of diverse Ministers to goe to me 4. the persuasions which these deputyes used To the first The Reader in considering the former Sections will find that my judgment hath bene against this promiscuous baptizing which the Answerer required from the first to this instant without any change To the second 1. It it is not to be expected that they should reprove or dislike that wrighting which was framed in defence of their customs 2. If this be alleadged for the reproofe of my dissenting from them how easily can I reply that no Synod of these Churches alloweth them to require this of me but I will answer him as Augustine doeth an Arrian with whom he had to doe saying Neither may I alleadge the Councill of Nice nor thou the Councill of Ariminum Contr. Max. Arr Cap. 14 thereby to prejudice one another but by the Scriptures which are witnesses proper to neither but commō to boath matter with matter cause with cause reason with reason ought to be debated But neither the five ministers produced any ground from the Scripture to warrant their opinion or practise in this particular not the Classis to justifye their approbation and confirmation thereof To the third 1. That is more fitly called a command then a counsail wherein a man is bound to rest and that under such a paenalty 2. Three Dutch Ministers being deputed to speake with me desired to know what J disliked in that letter I answered them 1 that I disliked
ill craved my assistance with much importunity My wife accompanied me thither and the Mrs. of the house where we lodged was pleased to accompany my wife being a stranger in these countryes which I had no cause to refuse but to take thanckfully and besides her not one member of the Church went along with us unles the mayd which attended her sucking child be a member which I thinck she is not Now what was to be blamed in this This the Reader shall ordinarily find that the Answerers complaints both against me and others have no other roote but the evill surmises of his owne jealous fancy pluck up that roote and the most of his complaints will dye of themselves His Answer to the 22. Section examined containing a wrighting first left with a freind or two and afterwards without my consent or knowledge printed MY defence of Answering his untrue reports in my wrighting and of having it in the hands of one or two freinds that might speake in the cause of the dumbe maintaine myne innocency in my absence the Reader shall find in my reply to the second Section Now the cavills which are to be found in this Section against that wrighting are to be examined First It is an injury to call that wrighting injurious which was a necessary declaration of the truth against slanders which were first secretly spread abroad by him in private speech afterwards by a large letter which he sent to his frend at N. in England now are by him scandalously published not only against me ego enim non sum tanti but against men of eminent worth and noate both living and dead Secondly How justly that wrighting is called a true report of passages the Reader will see by comparing what is sayd on both sides and how unjustly he excepteth against that title Thirdly When I assured the Reader that this English copy is a true translation out of the latine by this English copy I meant not which is printed For there are diverse faults in that it appeareth to have bene printed out of a very imperfect copy but that which I wrote As for his exception against it that having twise used that odious phrase pro imperio imperiously in the second place it is left out in my translation Repl The phrase is but a true expression of the thing let the odious thing be mended and the odious phrase shall not be used In the meane space the expression must be suitable to the action For is it not actus imperij an imperious act to deny a man convenient time for satisfaction about a matter of such consequence and to bind a man to observe customs and orders without shewing the aequity thereof Some would have called such an act tyranny and so shall I upon further provocation 2. As the use of the phrase is condemned so the omitting of it once in the translation is reproved Forgive me that wrong I thought he would see how unwilling I was to fasten their imperious dealing with me upon the Readers apprehension by repeating the word imperiously againe But let it stand in this second place also seing the Answerer will have it so and he shall find me with Gods assistance prove it to be a fit expression 3. Is my translation untrue because this word is once omitted Let the learned Reader judge whether it be necessary to the truth of a translation that every latine word be rendred into English especially when the sense giveth it sufficiently in the sentence If this be not to seeke a knott in a bulrush I know not what is Fourthly In my first wrighting how unable the Answerer is to discover any untruth in my report of the private conference betweene us the Reader will see by my examination of his Sect 11. in my Reply and will be further cleared hereafter Fifthly In my second wrighting he seemeth to find a foule untruth or falsification after his usuall manner of expressing himselfe both in the superscription and subscription thereof But what is it I sayd that those instructions were delivered by the Elders of the English Church deputed But 1 that translation sayth not by the Elders but to the Elders and that both in the superscription and in the subscription Is it not strange that he should then falsifye the translation when he complaineth of falsification in the translatour 2. suppose it had bene to the Elders deputed and that by Elders I meant any lawfully deputed by the Eldership yet I spake and wrote truely For I left the wrighting with Mr. W. who was deputed before by the Eldership having also told Mr. Wh of it praying him to communicate it with the rest that one or two Elders that should be deputed by the rest might present it to the Classis and having respect unto that agreement with them I used that expression before the meeting in confidence that it would have bene so ordered by them Now if no such deputation was made afterwards what is that to me who stiled the Elder by that title which best expressed my purpose and expectation neither was I in towne to alter it afterwards nor did I ever heare that no deputation was made in the Consistory till now The issue of all this deepe accusation what is it now but as when a great expectation was of the mountaines birth which was fained to be with child after which nothing appeared but a litle mouse running thence How just the complaint is also of his want of brotherly moderation I have noated in my reply to his Sect. 12. Sixtly In that which he speaketh concerning my third wrighting he multiplyeth injuries 1. In misreporting my intent in the three wrightings which was not to make him odious to the Classis nor to teach the Elders how to fill their mouthes with reproach of him nor to stirr up and incense the Congregation against him but ingenuously and candidly to report the truth whereunto I was called and compelled for the necessary clearing of my selfe for the remove all in some and prevention in others of causeles praejudices and jealousyes which already did or by my silence might arise in their minds against me by his suggestions Would the wrighting of those things accuse undermine and defame him It is a signe that his cause is not very good And if my wrighting those particulars be a fault who is to blamed for it but he who constrained me thereunto 2. In charging me with unjust uprayding of him for myne assistance of him and with a vaine boasting of my selfe To convince him of ill requiting me yea of rewarding evill for good I remembred what labour and patience I had excercised for his and the Churches peace This was no uprayding much lesse unjust nor vaine boasting but a just declaration of the truth the case requiring it and a sad complaint of his unthanckfullnes How he hath answered it will appeare in the examination of Sect. 2. 8. and 40. Whereunto as he
referreth the Reader so doe I and also to Sect. 11. and 14. that it may appeare how justly I complaine of the two injuryes which he noateth Also concerning the five objections answered by me in that third wrighting I doe concurr with him in referring the Reader to the Sections mentioned by him and examined by me where it appeareth that the first the second the third the fourth the fifth is not refuted but remaineth unanswered in Sect. 14. Sect. 15. Sect. 15. Sect. 10. Sect. 18. in like manner concerning my six reasons to prove that he never desired to have me to be his colleague of which reasons the first second third fourth fifth sixth is not answered in Sect. 9. Sect 8. Sect. 17. Sect. 12. Sect. 28. Sect. 6. Seaventhly In that which he addeth upon the grant of this supposition that he had not desired me diverse things are considerable 1. His unjust accusation of me by way of intimation as if I did quaraile and contend with him because he did not desire me whereas it is neither so nor so For neither was it my intent in that wrighting to quaraile but to answer objections nor did I blame him at all for not desiring me for he may use his liberty for me to place his desires upon a more desireable object but for pretending his desire to have me with him when he did really hinder my setling there 2. His Sarcasticall insultation when he tauntingly demandeth Is he such a man of desire c. Reply 1. It seemeth that I am not such a man of desire in his account yet in the esteeme of that Church and of the Classis how unworthy soever I am in my selfe it seemeth I am Else how comes it to passe that they account themselves so injuried by his opposing and rejecting me as appeareth in their complaints and that these so much desired that I might be promoted to the ministry of that Church Sect 12.16.19 as he hath formerly testifyed 2. If I am not such a man of desire in his account yet J should not be such a man of scorne and contempt to be so trampled upon in a strange land and exposed to reproach and that by a brother and in print whereby I am now become a man of sorrowes and that in many respects 3. His voluntary concession or acknowledgment by way of supposition and intimation that he withheld his desire from me in the act of Election is considerable For if when his voyce went with the rest for myne election he withheld his desire from me how can it be thought that he did at all desire me For did he give his vote for me Did he subscribe my call with his owne hand in that wrighting whereof himselfe was the penman Did he himselfe accompanyed with one of the Elders bring it to me and pray me to accept of it And yet did he withhold his desire from me in the act of election No marvayle then if he held me so to this question No marvayle that he refused the meanes propounded by me for accommodation No marvayle that he procured that wrighting of the five ministers howsoever by some of them intended in favour of me they thincking that he saught to accommodate me but which he made use of to strengthen himselfe against me No marvayle that it was procured to be ratifyed by the Classis and Magistrates that I should rest in it and conforme thereunto No marvayle that an order which the Elders would have made in Consistory to secure me from trouble for that was hindred by him and that the convenient time which they agreed upon to allow me for satisfaction was denyed by him No marvayle that other usages which I forbeare to mention of me have bene so unbrotherly that I say no more if he did not desire me 4. Jn the same way of supposition and intimation he seemeth to say that he was for another whom he might judge to be more lowly c. 1. This I complaine not of as an injury to me but I wish that he may both have such an one to be with him and may be such an one himselfe as he there describeth if he judge of these properties by a right rule As for me I shall account him the most lowly who with most selfe-denyall takes upon him Christs yoake and him most loving whose spirit closeth most strongly with all good men in all good wayes and him to be most faythfull and upright who doeth most excercise himselfe to have a conscience in all things voyd of offence both towards God and towards man In this sense he might have had men lowly loving faythfull and upright whom the Church desired but injoy not to their great greife and losse 2. It had bene more brotherly dealing to have admonished me in private if he had discerned any thing in me contrary to those properties rather then thus to traduce me in print or if he would publish such accusations to have proved them to be just and not thus without proofe to reproach me 3. The five Reverend Dutch preachers did not apprehend him to have such praejudices against me when they composed that wrighting which himselfe hath translated according to their words and published where speaking of me they say whom for diverse respects there mentioned we understand to be most deare unto Mr. P. It seemeth they were mistaken in their opinion of the Answerers love to me if his thoughts of me then were according to this wrighting 4. Himselfe subscribed the wrighting wherein I was called to the ministry in that Church which also was subscribed by all the Elders and Deacons wherein they thus expresse their esteeme of me in the feare of God having considered of such as might be fit thereunto we have set our eyes upon you c. being persuaded of your sufficiency learning and piety hoping also that through those gifts of the spirit wherewith the Lord hath indued you and wherein we have received much contentmēt you may be a speciall instrument of building up the Church of God by your godly labours amongst us This wrighting was penned by himselfe and his owne name subscribed with his owne hand wherein my fitnes for that place is so testifyed that it may seeme strange how one the same man should privatly wright that and yet publish this Eigthly When he sayth It is certainely a want of modesty and prudence in him to make such disputes about his owne desireablenes Ans 1. I onely shew the reasons of myne opinion that he did not desire me but of myne owne desireablenes I doe not speake at all much lesse dispute 2. Will any man condemne me for expecting that he should desire me with whom I should be joyned as Colleague in such a worke 3. What could I say lesse or more mildely I did not say he opposed me rejected me circumvented me or the like but only he did not desire me 4. Vpon my use of the same word certainly in
the second Section he sayd it is against modesty and conscience to pronounce so certainly touching the issue of things to come and yet himselfe useth the same confident asseveration in a case more improbable as will appeare to any man or to himselfe if he reduce his reasoning and discourse to prove such disputes as I have used about myne owne desireablenes to be a want of modesty or prudence into a Syllogisme The 23. Section examined of the Ansvverers rejecting the counsail of the Elders when matters have bene referred to them if he thought they would conclude against his purpose THe usefullnes of the Eldership in the Church being considered with the Honour which the Holy Ghoast putteth upon those who are called thereunto should warne all men to take heed of contemning them or occasioning others to dispise them First Act 14. p. 155. Their usefullnes appeareth in that the Holy Ghoast directed Paul and Barnabas to ordaine Elders by voyces in every Church Which text Mr. Nowell in this Catechisme alleadgeth to shew that there were in the well ordered Churches certaine Seniors chosen and joyned with the Pastor and thereby he would shew that the Pastor should not excommunicate alone without the judgement of the Church This place being so understood we may from hence noate two things to declare the usefullnes of such officers 1 Thess 5.12.13 1 Tim. 4.14 Act 15.6.23.16.4 Ambros in 1 Tim 5. 1. that they were appoynted to every Church 2. That they were solemnly ordayned being commended to the Lord with prayer and fasting which is not used in slight matters It appeareth also in that they are joyned by the wisdom of God with other officers of as necessary use in the Church as the members are in the body 1 Cor. 12.28 Secondly The Honour which the Holy Ghoast putteth upon them is very great as appeareth first in their imployments which are honourable services as to assist the Pastor 1. In admonishing offenders 2. In imposition of hands at the ordaining of officers 3. in consulting and counsailing about Church affaires the Apostles refused not their helpe herein and this use of them continued as Ambrose sayth till it was altered by the sloath or rather pride of Teachers who would seeme to be some body by doing all things alone 2. In the titles wherewith he honoureth them being thus imployed calling them (a) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb 13.7 17.24 Leaders (b) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Thess 5.12 Rom 12.8 Presidents (c) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act 20.28 1 Cor. 12.28 Overseers (d) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Chron. 19.8 1 Tim. 3.2 1 Tim. 5.17 1 Thess 5.12.13 1 Tim. 5.17 Heb. 13.17 Governments 3. In the qualifications required to be in them viz. to be such as doe the duety of their place in the feare of the Lord faythfully and with a perfect heart wise vigilant sober of good behaviour blamelesse In a word they must not be destitute of any good property whereby they may be fitted to rule well 4. In the carriage which the Holy Ghoast injoyneth the people to use towards them in they re well discharging their duety As to acknowledge them and to esteeme them very highly in love to account them worthy of double honour And to obey them Now then if any man shall despise this office as of no necessary use in the Church of God or if any shall goe about by disparadging speeches to disable them from doing the worke of their place or to discourage and dishearten them in it by a needles though true publishing their imperfections much more if the reports be untrue and mere ungrounded reproaches the injury is not only personall to the men but publick and common to the wholl Church which is much blemished either for want of it officers or for want of care to make a good choyse and to see that they discharge their duety as they aught and much disordered whilest those who should be admonished by them are now armed against them as men branded with a marke of partiality and insufficiency and disorderly walking and that by their Pastor and in print In which respect for the prevention of such dangerous consequences or effects it will be worth the while that we examine this second complaint concerning his slighting the Elders which I will breifely dispatch insisting principally upon those things which he calleth me to examine by mentioning my name which he wrighteth at length as his manner is least else it may be the Reader should forget that I am the marke he shooteth at thorough all these The Answerer sayth this complaint is a very unjust slander Ans Reply 1. If it be a slander it must needs be unjust for no slander can be just Yea if it be a slander it is a very great one for it is not against a private but a publick person a preacher of the Gospell and their Pastor and that not whispered in the eares of one but published to the view of many But if it be true the Answerers sinne is double 1 that he gave just cause of this complaint in a case not of private but of publick injury by depriving of his flock not of civill but of spirituall liberties to the violation of that order which Christ hath setled in the Church 2. That he unjustly chargeth them with a slander and so maketh himselfe guilty of calling good evill yea of the same sinne whereof he accuseth them viz slander For the more cleare and full understanding and judging of what is sayd on both sides it must be observed that the first three pretended answers are mere evasions and diversions of the Reader from the matter of the Complaint For First They doe not complaine of those decissions and determinations which have bene made by most voyces in the Eldership but of those which have bene hindred and rejected by him nor of his giving sentence by his authority alone but of his rejecting the authority of the Eldership and interposing the authority of the Classis to hinder their proceeding in things which might have bene ended amongst themselves nor that those resolutions which have bene concluded in Consistory have bene transacted without consent of most but that some considerable conclusions which most have agreed upon have bene by him rejected without sufficient cause So that unlesse he can acquitt himselfe of rejecting those determinations which have bene made by most voices in the Elderships and of hindring their proceeding in things which might have bene ended amongst themselves and that without sufficient cause the complaint appeareth to be just in this particular and no slander Secondly They doe not complaine of his opposing contradicting or rejecting their opinions and counsailes when they were against right and truth or hurtfull to the Church or to any member thereof but when matters have bene agreeable to truth and right and for the good of the Church upon unjust pretences of the Elders insufficiency and
partiality as in the cases instanced by them Thirdly They doe not complaine of his rejecting the counsaile of the Elders only by shewing his particular judgment as one Deacon may oppose the opinion of another in their owne session or as in a Senat Civill or Ecclesiasticall there may be difference and so opposition of opinions amongst men without rejecting such conclusions as are made by most voyces in things lawfull and aequall but of this they complaine that he so opposeth and rejecteth their power in some cases that he unjustly depriveth them of their power upon untrue pretences of their partiality and insufficiency to judge Fourthly In his fourth answer his accusing the Elders of partiality insufficiency is propounded by him but the grounds thereof or the proofes of it are not declared and so upon the matter just nothing is sayd Fifthly In his fifth answer he pretendeth just cause of his excepting against three of the Elders as partiall in this controversy about me And to make this cable strong he twisteth three causes as cords together that they professe themselves to be of the same opinion with me touching baptisme Ans 2. that they have by their example allowed and countenanced the meeting of diverse at a private excercise upon the Lords day after the Sermons were ended 3. that they made an act for my preaching amongst themselues as an assistant for a certaine time c. These are new crimes which former ages have not heard of Reply and after times will wonder at if all things be considered For the first Is it the sinne of partiality in the Elders to hold with any man in disliking and witnessing against evill customs as this promiscuous administration of baptisme is declared to be or to joyne without scandall or Schysme in a private excercise after the publick are ended or to make an act for a mans preaching amongst them as an assistant the publick necessity requiring it and the Church generally desiring it for a convenient time that he might understand those orders and customs of the Dutch Church whereunto his conformity is expected before he bind himselfe thereunto If so then to hold the truth to joyne in a peaceable and inoffencive use of private helpes for aedifycation and to provide for the publick good peace is an argument of partiality in an Elder The vanity of this pretence is manifest Let us see his second proofe Secondly Ans To prove them partiall he produceth another consideration viz that the Elders have made like complaints as these Complainants heretofore of his bringing matters to the Classis violently without their consent The Classis hath judged them parties Be it so 1. Is not this alleadged against himselfe For Reply now it appeareth not to be the complaint of some members only who might unjustly complaine thorough ignorance or misinformation but even the Elders who are eye witnesses of all that passeth in Consistory have made the same complaint Will not any man conclude that matters are injuriously carried indeed when not only some of the members but the Elders themselves also complaine thereof As for the Classis judging of them parties how easily may the Elders demand their grounds and proofe thereof and in case of want of sufficient evidence appeale from their sentence to the Scripture And is it not possible may we thinck to find partiality as well in the Classis as in the Consistory I wish they had expressed more aequanimity in the carriage of this buisenes for their owne and the Churches sake Ans Thirdly If that proofe fayle he hath one more which will hold as he imagineth Euen the Elders themselves have acknowledged that when some such complaints as these have bene brought unto them they had no power to judge thereof Reply The Answer of the Elders which is here reported is not necessarily to be understood as an acknowledgment of their want of power de jure by right to judge thereof but may be understood as a declaration or rather a complaint of their want of power defacto by other mens taking it out of their hands without right Now if that power which belongeth to them be taken from them without their consent and so before it be given and without warrant of the word and so before it be due it is no partiality to assume that by a due clayme which was unduely withheld from them and it is no presumption in them if knowing their right they give a new judgment of that thing which they had formerly waved not knowing that they had power to judge thereof So much for his pretences against them for partiality In his sixth answer he undertaketh to shew their insufficiency wherein Ans that he be not mistaken he professeth not to speake of that common insufficiency that is in all men c. but he excepteth against their insufficiency in some speciall cases and namely in such particulars whatsoever have bene already judged and determined in the Classis Reply So then Whatsoever the Classis shall take upon them to judge though it were unduely and disorderly brought to them shall bind the Church so as it must rest therein that they shall not meddle in it though they are not satisfyed about the aequity of their proceeding in it and though they doe not shew sufficient warrant from the word for their judgment and determination And this must hold in all cases whatsoever Me thincks the Answerer should upon a review voluntarily revoke this expression or that the Classis should professe against it in publick as some of the ministers have affirmed to me in private that they doe not assume any such power to themselves or if they be silent the provinciall Synod should provide that convenient meanes may be used to stop the spreadings of such an errour for many dangerous consequences which their wisdoms I doubt not will foresee following thereupon To me it is manifest that no Nationall Synod in these Countryes ever gave power to the Classes thus farr to deprive particular Churches of the right of judging things proper to themselves within themselves Neither is there one word in these complaints which being fairely construed for augâ—t I can discerne according to the intent and expression of the Complainants themselves requireth any thing but what the Nationall Synods have ordered and appoynted to be done for and to all the Churches and which the Classes if they be true to their owne rules in their first constition must see performed So farr are they from attempting the innovation and alteration of discipline and government so long practised in these reformed Churches Sect 24 25. 26. examined THeir second proofe of his depriving the Elders of their power in government for the good of the Church is Compl. that he hath protested against their judgment in matters which might have bene ended in the Consistory and in that respect aught not to have bene brought to the Classis yet he hath carryed them
thither This passage I would have passed by Reply if his frequent mentioning my name in the 25. and 26. Sections had not compelled me to examine it The cases wherein they complaine that he hath nedlesly waved the judgment of the Elders are three 1. concerning an order that should have bene made for my accommodation in the question about promiscuous administring Baptisme to all that are brought in that place Sect 25. 2. about be an agreement amongst the Elders that a convenient time should be given me to goe on in assisting the Answerer to see if in that time I could obtayne that this question might be layd aside and informe my selfe more fully concerning the orders and customs of the Dutch Church whereunto my conformity was required Sect 26. 3. Concerning his refusall to let Mr. Weld preach though he confessed he had nothing against him without consent of the Classis c. ibid. Whereby it appeareth that they doe not complaine of his seeking advise of neighbour ministers simply and absolutely but 1. in certaine cases there mentioned And therefore they doe not in their wrighting divide the one from the other into severall Sections for that is his owne contrivement but relate all together in one intire Sentence 2. the cases produced by them are such wherein the matter might have bene determined and concluded by the Eldership without violation of any order established in the government of those Churches 3. The matter was so carryed by him in this needles appeale to the Classis that their agreement was nullifyed These things being premised the insufficiency of his five answers in the 24. Section will be obvious to the indifferent Reader in particulars thus For the first His thincking that the Elders erre in their judgment in such cases as these in question is not a sufficient ground of an appeale as may appeare in reason For so no cause should be ended in their Consistory though the Elders unanimously consēt in their judgment if the Pastor differ from them out of an obstinate will without giving sufficient reason of his dissenting and then to what end are the meetings of the Eldership Whereas he calleth upon them to prove it by Scripture they may with better warrant require him to prove by Scripture the lawfullnes of such appeales in such cases for which they find no word commanding or approving them For the second Unlesse he can prove those agreements amongst the Elders to be sinnes and unfruitfull workes of darkenes he will be found guilty of a double sinne 1. that he opposed the Elders without just cause 2. that he misapplyeth Scripture to justifye his unjust opposition of them For the third It is granted that as Councills may erre so may Consistoryes much more easily and that all obedience aught to be in the Lord. But with all that the protesters against them aught to declare the aequity of their so doing from Scripture or good reason which hath not bene done by the Answerer For the fourth The pretended reason whereby the Answerer would justifye this Act taken from the very foundation of government and institution of diverse judicatories to take away disagreement strife controversies or different pleadings among men will not helpe him in the cases questioned unlesse he can prove 1. that the Classes are of the same use by Divine institution for the helpe of Pastors which have the assistance of their Eldership Deut. 1.12 with Cap. 17.8 whereof that judicatorye was for the helpe of Moses who was not able alone to beare the cumbrances and strifes of the people and of the Kings of Israel afterwards which they deny 2. that the causes in question which he carryed from the Consistory to the Classis 2. Chron. 19 8 9.10 are of the same nature with those causes betweene blood and blood betweene law and commandment statutes and judgments which were deferred to the Levites the Preists and cheife of the Fathers of Israel that men might be warned by them that they trespasse not against the Lord. This also they deny and may justly accuse him of misapplying the Scriptures noated by him in the margine 5. To the fifth It is true that the power of the Elders in government had not bene overthrowne by his bringing any matter unlawfully unto the Classis if it were the manner of the Classis in such cases to remitt the matter to the Consistory againe But what one instance can he produce in the particulars whereof they complaine or in any other case brought by him to them wherein the matter was remitted to the Consistory Why so It was not because the buisenesses were so weighty that it hath bene agreed in the Synods that they shall not be proceeded in without advise of the Classis nor because they concerned many Churches and therefore require the consent of all What then It was because the Elders could not satisfye him nor he them as he intimateth in the answer before But why was he not satisfyed Because he would not be satisfyed unlesse the matter might be carryed according to his will For no sufficient reason was given by him against it at that time So then if he will end a buisenes in the Consistory there it shall be ended but if he see that it will be carryed against his mind there it shall not be ended there but be taken out of their hands and carryed to the Classis where he knoweth how to bring his purpose about Thus he hath two strings to his bow But in the meane time is not the power of the Elders in governmēt overthrowne thereby Sect. 25. Jn the 25. Sect. they speake of an agreement amongst the Elders to make an order that those who were not mēbers of that Church should make themselves knowne to me Compl that I might be satisfyed concerning them before they should present their children to Baptisme in publick which they say would have ended that difference betweene us but he protested against it If this complaint be just is it not a greivance let us weigh his fowre answers to it Ans 1. He sayth there was no order made therefore they speake untrue and they know not what Reply Neither doe they say an order was made but it was agreed that one should be made What untruth is in this If any Is it not in his accusation 2. He sayth there is no evidence in theire Church booke that either the Elders had so agreed or that he had protested against it Nor doe they say it is recorded in the Church booke For how could it be recorded when it was never made and that by his hindring the making of it 3. He sayth If such an order had bene peremptorily resolved upon there had bene just reason for him to have protested against it seing the Consistory hath no power c. Travers de Discipl Ecelcs p. 121. But herein he opposeth Mr. Traverse who in his elaborate treatise de disciplinâ Ecclesiasticâ speaking of the
office of the Elders whom he fitly calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he sayth it belongs to them to see that all things in the Church of God be honestly godlily and orderly done And therefore they are to signifye to the ministers if any from other parts come to dwell amongst them concerning whose Religion they are not satisfyed that they may be dealt with before they come to the Lords table Also IF ANY INFANTS ARE TO BE BAPTISED and if there be any thing of that kind which appertaineth to the knowledge of the Overseers for the proffitable and decent administration of the Church Neither is the Answerer only against Mr. Traverse in this but reason it selfe is against him taken from the very foundation of that office in the Church as appeareth in what is already sayd concerning them in the 23. Section compared with what hath bene by me declared against the disorder of promiscuous baptising in the 12. Section 4. He sayth If he had protested against such an order c. Such a protest might have served for a direction to the right use of their power but did not tend to the destruction thereof If it had bene a mere declaration of his judgment and resolution though delivered in forme of a protest and had bene strengthned with good reasons and had bene left to them to consider of it might have served for a correction and direction to the right use of their power without destroying it But when a peremptory and inflexible resolution of opposing what they shall doe against his mind in this matter is held foorth without arguments from the Scripture or good reason to convince them of the aequity of that stiffnes in opposing and when it is not left within themselves but carryed from them to the Classis that by the interposition of their power and authority the Consistory may be hindred from executing or making such an order who seeth not that as by the former they have no direction from him about the right use of their power so by the latter their power is destroyed in this particular which may be proved thus That Act whereby the Elders are hindred that they can not provide for the godly comely and orderly administration of the Church doeth deprive the Elders of their power in government for the good of the Church But this Act of the Answerer in hindring the ending of this difference about baptisme c. by interposing the authority of the Classis for that end was an hindring of them from providing for the godly comely and orderly administration of the Church Ergo. Which proposition will he deny The first But that is taken from the nature of the Elders office as hath bene shewne out of Scripture and reason before And he knoweth it to be true Will he deny the Assumption That is proved by what I have shewen in the 12. Section against promiscuous administration of baptisme as it is in that place whence it will appeare to be not godly nor comely nor orderly and therefore the Elders have power and are bound to provide that it be not done in that Church Sect. 26. In the 26 Section Their second instance whereby they would prove that he depriveth the Elders of their power in government for the good of the Church by carrying matters out of their hands which might and should have bene ended in the Consistory Compl. is that agreement which was amongst them that I should have a yeares time to goe on in assisting the Answerer c. Now let us see how this is answered Ans 1. First He sayth it is untrue that the Elders agreed I should have a yeares time Reply How unjust this chalenge is may appeare 1. By the report of the Elders themselves who say that it was referred to voyces and by voyces agreed that I should have a convenient time and it was particularly expressed by one of the Elders and not gainsayed by the rest that a yeares time would be convenient for that purpose 2. Not onely they but the Answerer himselfe sayth as much in effect For in the 18. Section he reporteth that I made this offer unto them that if the Consistory desired it I would continue as an assistant in preaching for a convenient time that I might therein acquaint my selfe with the Dutch ministers the orders of the Classis and Synod and state of this Congregation c. But though our Elders liked of this offer sayth he and thought good to desire him to remaine with us as an assistant as is before sayd yet I thought it not safe sayth he speaking of himselfe without first taking advise of the Classis Whereby it is manifest that the Elders liked of the offer as it was made by me But they knew that I was of opinion that lesse then a yeares time could not be convenient for those purposes and that I meant that time when I spake of a convenient time yet if they had agreed that six moneths or three monthes should be judged a convenient time I should have rested therein which seing they did not but liked of the offer as it was made by me it seemeth their purpose was to conclude for a yeares time Secondly In stead of answering Ans 2 he recriminateth those that divulge the secret affayres of the Eldership and that untruely Reply The former reply sheweth that the report is not untrue And that the Elders have unlawfully divulged this they put him to prove for they deny that it is unlawfull to acquaint the members with passages of this nature which are not to be kept secret in the Consistory when they tend to the injury of the wholl Church Thirdly His third answer is a mere evasion Ans 3 by putting off the fault from himselfe upon the Classis Reply the vanity of which pretence hath bene so often shewen already that I may well praetermit it here Fourthly Ans 4 In his fourth answer he pretendeth to give reasons for his carrying this matter into the Classis which are not reasons but mere pretences First That whilest matters were thus kept in suspence the cord of contention should have bene drawne out and lengthned But who seeth not that this would have cut the cord of contention asunder when a convenient time had bene given for the composing of things to a peaceable conclusion and when the people should see his regard of their desire and content so far expressed Secondly That in the Consistory where he hath most trouble he should have least assistance But by this course he would have lesse trouble in the Consistory the spirits of men being somewhat quieted and contented Besides I see not but he might have escaped many troubles there if he had not made troubles when he found them not Thirdly That in the administration of Baptisme in stead of an Assistant he should have a Resistant But how could he be a Resistant in Baptisme whose worke was only to assist in
preaching as myne should have bene if this agreement had stood Againe suppose after the expiration of that convenient time I had accepted of the pastorall calling how could I have bene a Resistant to him in Baptisme if either the Dutch Ministers could in that time have convinced me of the lawfullnes of that custom in which case J should have yeelded to it or if I could have procured the laying aside of that question by their consent with me in establishing those meanes which I propounded for accommodation Fourthly That hereby the calling of another minister would be hindred But 1. the event sheweth the contrary For that convenient time which the Elders would have given me was but 12 moneths Now though upon this pretence the Answerer opposed that yet those 12 moneths were spent before they had any and 9 moneths more before one was setled with them 2. My purpose in that proposition was to worke in that time for the peaceable setling of any faithfull man whom they should make choyse of if I saw not greater likelihood of my comfortable setling there then hitherto had appeared Wherein my true intent was to prevent the trouble and procure the peace of the Church as much as in me lay The fifth pretenc◠is coincident with the fourth and answered in that Sixtly The Classis would have bene offended which had formerly disallowed such an agreement about Mr. H. But 1 consider as great a matter as this hath bene done there without the leaue of the Classis when the Answerer had a mind to it Was not Mr. D for a yeare and more assistant to the Answerer in the same Church in preaching without leave or consent of the Classis 2. If the Classis would be offended for this it would be an offence taken but not given For what though they had formerly disallowed such an agreement of the Elders about the intertayning of M. Hook May not the Church doe such a thing without their allowance What rule is transgressed thereby If any Let the Answerer shew it If none then the Classis disallowed that act and would be offended at this causelesly 3. At most this would have bene an offence but to the spirits of the Classis who would have bene angry at it as a neglect of them only not as a sinne against God But the hindering of this agreement by their Pastor and the Classis is an offence to the consciences of some of the Church who are greived at it as a sinne against God both in the Pastor and the Classsis who have hereby streightned the liberty and weakened the power which Christ hath given the Church in procuring such spirituall helpes for their aedification as they find proffitable and desire with a generall consent especially there being no danger of haeresy and schysme whereby themselves or other Churches should be infected thereby Now compare these two offences together and it will appeare that the latter offence in this case was more carefully to be heeded and prevented then the former The seventh and last pretence is that he esteemed this agreement as an act of intrusion for me which he needed not to have feared nor would have by so injurious a course prevented if he had knowne me as he might have done by my wholl carriage in this buisenes Himselfe reproacheth me for standing so much upon his desiring me and now he feareth least I had some purpose of intruding my selfe How will these stand together One while he telleth the Reader that I would not accept the call another while that I will not be dismissed A strange case that I am so averse that they can not get me in and yet so intruding that they cannot get me out By this it may appeare that his spirit was much distempered by needles Iealousyes and groundles surmises which in these passages have caused much disquietment to himselfe and disturbance to others The 3. instance And that it may appeare that I wrong him not in saying thus his owne words about the third instance which they bring to prove that he depriveth the Elders of their power in governmēt for the good of the Church declare the same For speaking of Mr. Weld whom they accused him for hindring from preaching without leave of the Classis though he professed he had nothing against him he telleth the Complainants that he had some thing against Mr. Weld If they desire to know what he readily telleth them and all the world that he had something against his behaviour in generall which was an offence and trouble unto him It had need to be some great matter some will thinck that so farr sett him off from Mr. Weld as he there intimateth To prevent all wondring at the matter he roundly relates more dislikes then one But if you come to examine them they will appeare to be grounded upon needles jealousyes in his owne mind For his first dislike was because Mr. Weld refused to declare himselfe and to shew his opinion touching their present controversyes And have not others carryed themselves in the same manner as well as he which were greater strangers to him then Mr. Weld being not of his nation whom yet he hath not only willingly received to preach but also bene willing to have joyned with him in the pastorall office His second dislike of Mr. Weld was that he saw him most familiar with those that were his cheifest opposites So then there was opposition amongst them before I came and this opposition was raysed to such an height that the Answerer accounted it a trouble and offence to him that any minister should be most familiar with those whom he accounted his opposites and that upon feare least Mr. Weld should strengthen and animate them against him he was unwilling to have him preach That this feare may not seeme altogether causeles he telleth his Reader how Mr. H. preached against that in the afternoone which he taught in the fore noone The truth concerning this passage I have heard from diverse witnesses and have seene the noates of boath their sermons as they were taken by those that heard and doe find so farr as I can discerne by what I have heard or read that the Answerer tooke offence at Mr. H causelesly for that and that Mr. H. was called and in a manner compelled to say what he did at that time But that I may returne to Mr. W. was the Answerers feare of him retayned in his owne breast No he telleth us in his second answer that he desired the counsaile of the Dutch Consistory about this matter and their advise was that he should bring it to the Classis Thus the Answerer is troubled the Dutch Consistory is troubled the English Church also is troubled and all about his feare of Mr. Weld But was this feare well grounded was there sufficient cause for it Let himselfe speake and he will tell us yea he hath already told us in his third answer that upon further conference with Mr.
W he perceived in him a peaceable disposition and conceived that he would not give offence by his preaching amongst them It is well that his apprehension is rectifyed at last to perceive that which he did not before That conference did not alter Mr. W disposition but his owne persuasion of him so that the change was in the Answerer not in M. W. As a man in a ship thincks that the shore moves from him whereas the ship wherein he is is carryed from the shore so a man whose passions are disturbed suspecteth every man to oppose him When all was now quiet what course tooke the Answerer He telleth us that he made the same knowne to the Classis whereupon he was admitted to preach And why must this be made knowne to the Classis Is it against the government of these Churches that a stranger to whom the Answerer can impute no errour and in whom he preceived a peaceable disposition and conceived that he would not giue offence by his preaching amongst them being desired by the Church should be permitted to preach a sermon â— 2 or 3 in the English Church without leave of the Classis Can not the Elders doe so much without them Then the complaint is just that the Elders are deprived of their power in government for the good of the Church And seing whilest the Answerer seemed unsatisfyed the Dutch Consistory seemeth to apprehend it to be a case of some difficulty to permit Mâ— W. to preach but when the Answerer is satisfyed the Classis consenteth it appeareth that the complaint concerning the injury is justly against the Answerer at whose instigation and intreaty the Classis doeth interpose so farr in their matters though in this they can not be excused much lesse justifyed in that they assume a power to themselves of restrayning Churches from having the benefit of the assistance of a stranger and pass â—t in such a case without their leave which is more power then the government of these Churches giveth them or any prelates ever chalenged to themselves for aught I know Section 27. examined concerning the undue power of the Classis IN this and the fowre following Sections they make their third complaint of his government viz that he subjecteth that Church under an undue power of the Classis which they aggravate two wayes 1. by his indirect aymes in it for they conceive that he doeth it merely for his owne ends 2. by his irregular pitching upoÌ„ such meanes for the attayning of his ends For they say he doeth it without any warrant from the word of God For our more orderly and cleare proceeding in examining these five Sections I will premise some thing in thesi concerning the power of Classes and then descend to the hypothesis and try how just their complaint is Whereunto the Answerer compelleth me not onely by his frequent mentioning my name which he wrighteâ—â— at its full length every where in the next Section 30 times in lesse then three leaves of paper but also by his acensing me as an opposite to the government of these Churches by Synods and Classes This to be a mere slander the indifferent Reader will judge by what I have already said in examination of former Sections All lawfull Authority I am alwayes and shall be ready to acknowledge with due submission thereunto even when I freely testifye against all usurpation and tyranny and plead for the observation of those ancient limits and bounds which God hath set But I proceed to the matter concerning Classes Jt is not my purpose to speake of the originall of them nor of their antiquity nor to contend about the name given them much lesse to coÌ„demne all use of them Medull Theol lib. 1. Cap. 39 Sect 27. from which I am so farr that I freely confesse with Dr. Ames though the Answerer traduceth both him and me as otherwise minded that particular Churches as their Communion requireth and the light of nature the aequity of rules and the examples of Scripture teach may and in many cases ought to enter into a mutuall consociation and confaederation amongst themselves in Classes and Synods that they may use their common consent and mutuall helpe so farr at it may commodiously be done especially in those things which are of greater moment Provided alwaies that speciall care be taken that under pretence of helping the Churches they doe not hinder them by taking away and diminishing that liberty and power which Christ hath given them It was some such abuse that made Greg Nazianzen so bitter against Councells Epist 42. ad Procop. that he resolved to shun all such assemblyes Which Dr. Whittaker imputed to the evill event Contra. Camp p. 83. edit 1601. whereunto the ambition polypragmony of some men had brought matters who in stead of composing former differences ending those controversyes made new ones which agreeth with Nazianzens owne expression of the reason why evills were rather increased then diminished by them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. For Contentiousnes and ambition prevayled more then reason And it may be some such provocation caused that learned politick man Hugo Grotius so to slight the authority of Classes and Synods Pietas Ordinum Holl. ac West-Fris as he did in that treatise which he published against Sibr. Lubbertus upon which Bogermannus published his Annotations learnedly and succinctly penned in defence of D. Sibrandus wherein for answer of that part which concerned the necessity and authority of Synods he referred Grotius to what Iunius had written against Bellarmine de necessitateeâ—p otestate Conciliorum wherein I fully agree with Iunius But we are now to speake of a more imperfect combination of Churches then that which is in provinciall Synods viz a Diocesan union of them in Classes Betwixt which and the imperfect combination of Churches in and about Geneva there is some difference For that is a voluntary conjunction of the smaller Churches with the greater in one Consistory for their helpe in their particular Church buisenesses the smaller Churches wanting men fit for the manadging of their Church affayres and making one presbytery Zanch. in 4. praecept with the next greater Church which being better fitted meete weekely in their owne Consistory and these with them But this is a combination which is betweene diverse Churches which having their severall presbyteryes or Consistoryes apart send their deputyes viz one Minister and one Elder to meete with the like deputyes from all other Churches Synops pur Theol. disp 49. Thes 5. in such a Diocesse or division at a time and place appoynted to handle such things as concerne many Churches in common and as could not be ended in the Consistoryes of the particular Churches Concerning these the question is in this and the following Sections for the discussion whereof I will propound two things to be considered in thesi or in generall 1. What kind of combination that is which is lawfull amongst Churches 2.
in the Church then in the Pope What that learned wrighter sayth of the Churches power in comparison with the Pope holds in all other paralell instances To these I may add those who have written concerning the right ordering of Churches according to the Scripture I will not stand to give a Catalogue of their names though I might be plentifull therein but will content my selfe with the three wrighters of this kind whom the Answerer pretended in conference with me to make for him and I shall shew them to be strongly against him Mr Cartwright and Mr. Fenner and Mr. Parker men of our owne nation Sect. 4. p. 53. 1. For Mr. Cartwright The very place in his booke whereunto the Answerer referred me I have examined before and have shewen how litle helpe he will have from him De Sacra Theol. lib. 7. p. 279. 2. For M. Fenner He speaking of the Ecclesiasticall presbytery distinguisheth betweene the Eldership of one particular Church which he sayth is properly called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Eldership of many Churches P. 277. 278. The Eldership of the first sort he sayth is a compound office wherein all the Elders doe in the name of the wholl Church administer all the buisenesses of the Church that is of the Lord by common authority and counsaile And for this purpose he alleadgeth many texts out of the old and new testaments These buisenesses he sayth are either judiciary or extrajudiciary Iudiciary buisenesses are such things as are to be defined by the judgment of the Church which are either matters doubtfull which must be defined by the Scriptures or censures to be administred Extrajudiciary buisenesses are Elections ordinations cheife care of disposing the holy treasures keeping of order in the assembly and all things which are to be done Yet in matters of greatest moment and which concerne the good or ruine of the wholl Church he sayth the Elders after consultation had among themselves must tell their opinions to the Church that if they have any thing to counsail or to object it may be brought in and afterwards the opinions and assent of all being declared matters are to be concluded unlesse it be necessary to referr the buisenes to a greater assembly of Elders for the avoyding or composing of differences which is then to be done when the difference is betweene the greater part of the Church And these matters of the greatest moment are the censures excommunication and absolution from it which is to be done in the assembly by the AUTHORITY OF THE WHOLE CHURCH orders also of the greatest moment to be made controversyes of fayth to be composed the elections and just deposing of Ministers other things aequall to these or greater then they all which must be thus transacted as he plentifully declareth from Scripture Thus I have faythfully translated the words of this eminent light in his time Mr. Dudley Fenner who was joyned with Mr. Cartwright in the publick ministry to the English Company in Antwerpe to whom and to that worke of his Mr. Cartwright in an epistle to him praefixed to that booke giveth a singular testimony comparing him to Moses who from Mount Nebo viewed the wholl land of Canaan as it were with one cast of his eye to whom the Answerer him selfe referred me wherein I admire his confidence as to one that made for him The Reader may see how he leaveth the wholl power of jurisdiction in the particular Church and bindeth them no further to make use of other Ecclesiasticall Senats out of themselves then necessity requireth and he doeth not acknowledge that it is a case of that necessity but when the avoyding of troubles and dissentions in the Church makes it necessary And when is that Not when one alone contentiously differeth from all the rest But when the difference is among the greater part And that in such a case the judgment of the wholl Church is first to be tryed and the opinions and assent of all being declared matters are to be concluded Idem ibid p. 280. Else where he sayth that the presbytery of many Churches is to compose and end such things onely as cannot be ended in particular Churches Act. 15.1 to 8. 2. Chron. 20.33 Act. 16.4 And these are cases either proper to those Churches which are brought to them or things common to many Churches and so taken up by them I demand of the Answerer whether he be of this worthy wrighters judgment or not If not why did he referr me to him for satisfaction If yea why is his practise so different from it For in this buisenes though of so great consequence that it indangered the breaking of the Church if I had not sat downe quietly and suffered wrong for peace sake the Answerer alone opposing the desire of the Elders and of the greater part of the Church and the buisenes being proper to the Church and which might have bene ended among themselves yet against the liberty and right of the Church if Mr. Fenners judgement be right he would carry it to the Classis that he might effect his purpose De polit Eccles lib. 3. Chap. 1. 3. For Mr. Parker He largely and strongly proveth this position potestas Ecclesiastica essentialiter primario in ipsâ Fcclâ—siâ tanquam in subjecto proprio residet The power ecclesiasticall doeth essentially primarily reside in the Church it selfe as in its proper subject The sense wherein he thus spake to prevent all suspicion of his pleading for popular confusion he declareth out of Zanchy who sayth Zanch in praecept 4. quest 3. toti Ecclesiae dedisse Christum claves sed ita ut in Ecclesiâ certi essent qui clavibus utantur ad salutem Ecclesiae honoremque Dei That Christ gave the keyes to the wholl Church but so that there should be certaine men that should use the keyes to the good of the Church and glory of God For the proofe of the former that the right of power is in every particular Church he useth five Arguments in the 6 7. chapters then in the 8. chapter he cometh to speak of the excercise and ordinary execution of this power which is he sayth in the Church-officers or rulers yet with this moderation that this dispensation of the Churches power in the officers be according to a well tempered forme partly Aristocraticall partly Democraticall the Church committing those things to the presbytery which it can not commodiously performe by it selfe and retaining that excercise of power which belongs to the dignity authority and liberty which it hath received from Christ Thus he wholy destroyeth that democraty or popular Anarchy which Beza justly condemneth in Morellius and is by some unjustly imputed to those that plead for a due reformation of Churches according to the rules of the word and the primitive patternes Of the first sort of things which the Church committeth to the Rulers because it cannot commodiously performe them by
and binding lawes for any thing expedient to the Common wealth Whereunto subjects are bound readily to submit 1. Pet. 2.13 Things properly called indifferent I doe not find in Scripture that ever Churchgovernours did advise perswade them much lesse charge cōmand them least of all make standing binding lawes to determine them nor doth that place in 1. Cor. 14.40 give them any such power nor have the Apostles themselves received any such authority from Christ as appeareth in the commission given them which was onely to teach men to observe and doe what Christ shall command them Mat. 28.20 Their office being onely ministeriall oeconomicall Christ reserving to himselfe the soveraigne lawgiving power as his praerogative For application of the premises to the case in question I demand whether this custom be thus imposed as a thing properly indifferēt or as expedient or as necessary in some considerable respect or as absolutely necessary If it be properly indifferent why doe they by command make the practise of it necessary If it be expedient let them shew the expediency of it leave men free If it be necessary in those considerable respects let it appeare that the contrary practise will be so offensive or disorderly that for the avoyding of that offence or disorder a minister is bound to doe it If it be absolutely necessary to godlines let the Scripture be shewē that cōmandeth that practise or forbiddeth the cōtrary His fourth answer is not worth a Reply His fifth answer maketh against himselfe For if they leave men at liberty about things indifferent c. wherein they are to be approved as walking according to the rule why doe they bind men by unaequall conditions to this custom which they neither doe nor can sufficiently declare to be commanded by Christ or to be warranted by the rule Let us now see what he sayth to the proofes of the justnes of their laying the blame of this miscarriage upō him rather then upō the Classis First They say that some of the Dutch Ministers themselves are willing to cast off some of their customs if the vastnes of theire Church did not force them thereunto Hereunto he giveth two answers 1. that things simply unlawfull are as well to be cast off in a great Church as in a small Reply True it is a duety as necessary to be done in the one as in the other yet it may more easily be done in the smaller Churches and therefore the sinne of the smaller Churches is the greater if they doe not cast off such an unwarrantable custom The vastnes of their Churches doth only excuse them a tanto not a toto 2. that in the smaller Churches in the villages the same order is observed But. 1. it hath not bene expresly required of any of the Ministers of those Churches as a condition of their admittāce as it was of me that they should rest in such a wrighting which bindeth them to baptize all that are brought 2. It may be questioned whether all the Ministers in those smaller villages doe so promiscuously administer Baptisme as they doe in Amsterdam seing such different sorts of people are not in those villages as in that Citty Secondly They say that one of the Ministers said to the Answerer in the Classis upon occasion of his complaining of my not conforming to all their orders why you your selfe doe not conforme to all our orders Hereunto he pretendeth to give five answers I say pretendeth For the first answer is no answer but onely a question who told this His second answer is that the mind of the Classis is not to be collected by the speech of one Neither doe they say that all of thē are of that mind but that one of them said so whereof it seemeth the rest shewed no dislike and so seemed to consent to it and more then one of them have bene heard to say as much as the Complainants affirme His third answer is that the speech of the Minister is not in right manner repeated by them But if the matter be right it is true in the substance of their report which is sufficient in this case what ever fayling may seeme to be in a circumstance His fourth answer is that this one Minister undertooke in wrighting to satisfye my objections and having replyed to myne answer received no answer to his second wrighting It is true I did not answer his second wrighting 1. Because that wrighting did not sufficiently answer my first 2. Because at that time I wrote to the wholl Classis in which respect there was no use of wrighting to one member of the Classis alone His fifth answer is The nationall Synod at Dort in things indifferent Kercken ordeningh Art 85. doeth allow Churches of other Nations in these Countreys to vary from their customs It is well they doe so and it is fit they should so doe But if it be so 1. why was it required of me that I should conforme to all the orders and customs of the Dutch Church 2. Why was I not allowed to vary from their customs in the practise of promiscuous baptizing seing I professed that I could not doe it with a good conscience and they gave me no grounds from the Scriptures to satisfye my conscience that I might doe it lawfully Thirdly They say that the Dutch Ministers have professed that they should have bene glad that this difference might have bene ended among our selves What sayth the Answerer hereunto Iust nothing And it was his wisdom to be silent here For what could he say He could not deny it and the confession of it to be true would discover him to have bene a greater impediment of the Churches desire and my accommodation then he was willing should appeare And I wish from my heart he had bene as silent in all the rest that I might have passed by all these injuryes in silence warrantably Fourthly They say that he hath required of the Elders that an order might be made in the Consistory that whatsoever Minister shall hereafter be called to that Church should conforme to that wrighting of the five Ministers Hereunto he pretendeth to give five answers but one good one were worth them all His first answer is onely a question as before who told this His second answer is in part negative but upon an ill ground viz because the Classis had already approved and confirmed it Concerning the vanity of that pretence enough hath bene spoken already yet in part he affirmeth it in saying that he shewed it to be unreasonable if that order should not be required of any other minister as well as of me But seing there was no good reason why it should be required of me what reason is there that it should be required of others Is it a good course to hide an injury done to one by professing to doe the same injury to many His third answer is that by the motion of a Dutch Minister and a
speciall freind of myne c. the Dutch Ministers came to his house and made that wrighting That Reverend Dutch ministers love and paines I acknowledge with all thanckfullnes and am sorry that a learned and godly Brother of another Nation should shew himselfe more desirous of myne accommodation then myne owne countryman from whom in many respects I had cause to expect more favour and love then from forraigners especially seing their labour proved no more succesfull thorough the violence of a contrary streame of which enough hath bene said in former Sections His fourth answer chargeth me with untruth in my wrighting to the Classis that at his request alone they did in wrighting declare their private judgment But why did he not at least more roundly deny it if it be untrue For it may be true notwithstanding any thing sayd by him to the contrary For why might not that Minister propound it to the rest being thereunto prepared by the Answerers private intimations or intreaty But suppose the Minister propounded it of his owne accord yet what I wrote is true in the sense wherein I meant it For I spake of the Answerer alone not in reference to the Ministers of the Classis but in reference to the Elders of his owne Church and in this sense it is true that the Answerer considered with the Elders and the Church did alone propound it the motion came not from the Elders but from him onely in that sense But what is this to the order which he required the Elders to make in the Consistory which is the matter in question Is this a fit place to speake of passages betweene the five Ministers him when the Complainants charge him with seeking to make an injurious order in the Consistory Had not the twelfth Section bene a fitter place for this matter where it is purposely spoken of But I forbeare to gesse at the reason hereof Whereas he addeth if he had bene the onely secker thereof there is no cause for them that meane to deale uprightly to complaine of such a lawfull safe course I need not to add any thing in way of Reply thereunto having already said enough in the foregoing Sections to prove that that course was neither safe nor lawfull His fifth answer is a mere catching at an advantage which one expression in their wrighting seemeth to give him I say seemeth for it doeth it not really They say that they thinck no godly man will absolutely be bound to conforme to that wrighting To let passe his unworthy scoffes he accuseth them of a rash and praesumptious judgment for saying so whereas 1. they professe onely that they thinck so Now every thought though it may be rash is not to be accounted a praesumptious judgement 2. they doe not speake of suffering themselves to be bound to such a wrighting but of being absolutely bound to conforme to it And there is a great difference betweene those two expressions 3. My name is altogether needlesly brought in here as the Reader may well perceive But I passe it by But is his seeking to have that order made in the Consistory to bind all Ministers that shall be called in that Church proved to be lawfull and for the good of the Church by this or by any thing else he hath sayd in the 5 pretended answers If not It appeareth that no satisfaction is given to the Complainants by his answers And so their second proofe of his subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis which they produce for an evidence of his not behaving himselfe as he aught in his pastorall government remayneth unanswered Sect. 30. examined concerning the Answerers violent bringing matters into the Classis when he cannot have his will unjustly satisfyed in the Consistory IN this Section they produce the third proofe of the justnes of their complaint of his subjecting the Church under an undue power of the Classis to wit his violent bringing of matters to the Classis when he cannot have his will unjustly satisfyed Which complaint they agravate by the dangerous consequent or rather effect of it for they say he destroyes the power of the Church utterly often affirming they can doe nothing in these cases without the Classis And to prevent an objection against themselves about what they had said concerning the undue power of the Classis they professe their reverent esteeme of them for counsail advise in all difficult matters that cannot be ended in theire owne Consistory That what is said on boath sides concerning this matter may the more easily and clearely be understood these things must be premised 1. that they doe not complaine of his taking advise and counsail of the Classis in difficult matters For therein they say they esteeme reverently of them 2. Nor that they bring such matters to the Classis as cannot be ended in their owne Consistory But the thing they complaine of is 1. that he bringeth such things to the Classis as may be ended in the Consistory 2. that he doeth it violently that is without consent of the rest 3. that his principall motive or inducement thereunto is the satisfaction of his owne will 4. That he doeth it under a pretence that the Church can doe nothing in such matters to wit as those in question the making of an order for a decent and orderly performance of a Religious duety in a right administration of baptisme and the chusing of their owne Pastors when they pitch upon men abhorring all haeresy and schysme c. and craving the helpe of an assistant for a time in the Churches necessity which they truely say is a destroying of the power of the Church Now let us see his answers hereunto which are fixe 1. His first answer is It is no act of violence but a refuge against violence to refer those things to the Classis which men conceive to be unjustly done or delayed in the Consistory Reply Violence is either opposed to that which is just or to that which is voluntary In their complaint the sense seemeth carry it to boath and so that is violently done which is done both unjustly and without consent That he did it without consent the Answerer acknowledgeth but denyeth that he did it unjustly and retorteth the imputation of violence and injustice upon them either for doing or delaying some thing in the Consistory unjustly He is now become an accuser of them and plaintiffe and therefore according to his owne rule is to bring proofe If he say they did unjustly in making orders about such matters without the consent of the Classis let him shew what rule is transgressed thereby This he should have done before he had taken the matter out of their hands and carryed it into the Classis that they might have bene convinced of the aequity of his so doing If he can not Let him beare the just blame of slandering the Cōsistory in print and of depriving the Church of her due
power in her owne matters which the law of God and the Synodall canons of these lands acknowledge to be due to her in things of this nature as it hath bene formerly declared And therefore he need not scoffingly aske of these Complainants for their warrant or evidence that he destroyeth the power of the Church Those spoken of in Sect. 27. have given it Ioh. 12.7 if he will give the dayes leave to speake and the multitude of yeares to teach wisdom 2. His second answer accuseth them of folly and that order in the Church which they plead for according to the ordinance of Christ as a bondage servitude burthen oppression c. Reply They complaine that when he can not have his will unjustly satisfyed in the Consistory he violently without their consent bringeth matters thence into the Classis Jf this complaint be just it is not slight His carriage in late differences maketh it suspicious that the roote of the matter is in him For let the ground of these troubles be considered and it will be found that the thing for which he contendeth is not necessary either as a meane for Gods glory and the Churches aedification or as commanded of God nor is it injoyned in any Canon of these Belgick Nationall Synods nor is it expresly and particularly required by any Classis of any Dutch Ministers in their admission So that it is not difficult to determine from what distempered principle these disordered motions have arisen and who is to be accounted burthened in this respect As for the folly which he chargeth upon the Complainants that pretending to stand for the liberty of the Church they seeke to bring themselves into bondage the question is whether is the way of liberty or bondage to the Church That which Christ hath appointed or that which men without Christs warrant have devised If the way of Christ is the way of liberty the question will be which is the way of Christ whether that particular Churches have power within themselves to chuse a fit Pastor and to crave the helpe of one well knowne unto them in time of the Churches necessity to see that Baptisme be decently orderly administred or that they so depend upon Classes for their leave permission herein as to be hindred by them from doing any of these at their pleasure If the first is the way of Christ let the Answerer beware that he be not found a false witnesse against Christ and his wayes in making them wayes of folly and servitude c. If the latter be the way of Christ let him shew it and not say it onely I say shew and prove it by Scripture for the satisfaction of the people that depend upon his ministry And till he can doe that let him forbeare such expressions 3. His third answer is by asking what men should doe when they thinck the Elders to be in an errour Reply If a man thinck them to be in an errour what should he doe else but shew them their errour by the word and if the case prove difficult crave with common consent the helpe of other mens or Churches light as occasion shall require to make the matter cleare But the rule warranteth not any man upon his mere thought that they erre to carry the matters quite out of their hands power without their consent or declaring the aequity of his so doing to the satisfaction of the Church For upon such a pretence if the Classis be partially addicted to the Minister all Church proceedings will be hindred And hence it was indeed as Dr. Bilson observed that the frequency of Synods did diminish the authority necessity of the Consistorian meeting of Elders For after that the meeting of Synods twise a yeare was ordayned in the Councill of Nice and Calcedon the Elders began to be in lesse use and account the Synods as higher judges taking upon them the examination and decision of those things which were wont to be agitated in the presbyteryes What he sayth of the Hierarchicall Synods in that place will be found true also of the Classis by this course and much more seing they meete sixe times a yeare 4. His fourth answer needeth no other reply then what is made already to the like if not the same pretence in his fifth answer examined in the 23. Section whereunto J referr the Reader 5. His fifth answer is already replyed upon in examination of the 27. Section 6. His sixth answer also is replyed upon before in severall passages and the vanity of it discovered Sect 31. examined concerning his subjecting the Church under the Classis without their consent THe authority and power which they complaine that theyr Church is subjected under is still by the Complainants declared to be undue by another instance in that it is such as is not competent to any men that are not subject to errour and hereunto they add another aggravation viz that it is done without the Churches consent Lib. 3. Cap. 26. p. 370. M. Parker in his learned discourse of Ecclesiasticall policy sheweth at large that Churches are no furher under the authority of Synods then they have subjected themselves by their owne consent And as for binding men to rest in their determinations as if they were infallible both Dr. Whittaker and Iunius in shewing that Councills are subject to errour have given sufficient light for discovery of the evill of that practise But let us see what he answereth to this complaint in seaven particulars 1. His first is after his usuall manner It is untrue but when the Church is hindred from making an order for the decent orderly administration of holy things by their owne power under pretence of his taking advise of the Classis as it was in the question about Baptisme when J was required that for a coÌ„dition whereupon I was to be admitted or refused to rest in a wrightâ—ng of five Ministers no rule being shewne me by them from the Scripture to warrant their so doing these things shewed it to be true 2. His second answer is that the same thing may be alleadged against any Pastor in the reformed Churches But this is an injury to all reformed Churches and Pastors unlesse he can prove that in the fame particulars they subject their Churches to the same undue power of Classes and in the same manner as he hath done Which he never will be able to doe It is true that Classicall assemblies or such like are a speciall bond of union and sinew of government in them all but to argue from the lawfull use to justify the unlawfull abuse of them is unsound reasoning 3. His third answer is to their charging him with doing this under a pretence of asking and taking advise of the Classis Which he denyeth and sayth that he professeth openly the authority and power of Synods and Classis to be lawfull and necessary as well as their counsail and advise Neither doe they
deny the authority and due power of Synods and Classes to be lawfull and necessary but they complaine of an undue power and authority ascribed to Classes by the Answerer and they declare by instances what that power is which they account undue Now unlesse he can prove that power to be due which they have affirmed to be undue he hath not answered their complaint which is that under pretence of asking and taking their advise he subjecteth the Church under that power which they affirme to be undue That he doeth so subject them hath bene shewed and that he pretendeth onely to aske and take their advise his owne expressions both by speeches at other times and in diverse passages of this booke declare sufficiently 4. His fourth answer is to their saying that the Church never acknowledged any such power to be due whereunto he answereth 1. by shewing the agreement betweene the ancient English inhabitants there the Magistrates and the Dutch Ministers which was to have such an English Church as should accord with the Dutch in the same order of Discipline and Government 2. By declaring that since his first comming but he sayth not how long after his first comming he was admitted to be a member of the Classis 3. By shewing the manner of their receiving members viz by profession of the same fayth with them and by solemne promise covenanting to submit unto the discipline of this Church according to the rule of Christ But what is in all these passages to prove their submission to any undue power and authority of the Classis Nay when they professe to submit unto the discipline of this Church according to the rule of Christ doe they not therein implicitly professe against submission to any undue power of the Classis And as litle doeth the practise of any members since in resorting to the Classis upon occasion of asking their judgment in matters controverted among them establish any undue power of theirs And to what end should those that joyne with his Church leaving their separation come with a protest against the undue power of the Classis when they knew not of their subjection thereunto no more being required of them in their Covenant at their first admission then submission to the discipline of this Church according to the role of Christ As for that which he addeth of their chusing rather to continue as they were then to be of the English Synod this doeth not testifye their acknowledgment of their subjectiō to any undue power of the Classis But how were they under the Classis when not long before that the Answerer himselfe as Mr. Forbes assured me laboured to set up an English Classis or Synod which not succeeding in his indeavour at that time he never after attempted to procure nor would joyne with being after set up at the procurements of others As for St Offw report of Geneva we have already shewne some difference betweene the association of Churches in Geneva and the Classes in these Countryes But be that as it may it makes nothing for the warranting of any undue power of the Classis 5. His fifth answer is to that passage in the complaint when they say that the power which they complaine of is such as the Scriptures doe not in any place give to such a company of Ministers The fault that he findeth herewith is that they doe not alleadge any one place of Scripture to condemne the same As though Negative Arguments from Scripture were not sufficient proofes of the unlawfullnes of a thing in matter of Religion By the helpe of St. Offw booke he accommodateth the 15. of the Acts. concerning the Church at Antioch seeking helpe of the Church at Ierusalem in a difficult question to the present question But what is that to the undue power of the Classis whereof they complaine In his next answer it may be he will give me occasion of shewing that that very place of Scripture maketh strongly against that undue power which he ascribeth to the Classis in the particulars complained of and such like 6. His sixth answer is to that part of the Complaint when they say that the undue authority whereof they complaine is such as doeth not become any except the Apostles that could not erre to have This he sayth is false and absurd and upon this occasion he reproveth me for a like speech in my letter to the Classis touching my consent required to the wrighting of the five Ministers namely that such a subjection is greater then may be yeelded unto any Councill whether of Classes or Synods c. that thereby the wrightings and decrees of men are made infallible and aequall with the word of God which is intolerable Reply Jt is true that I so wrote and that which I wrote herein is true Let us now see what he answereth He sayth what wise man is there that sees not the strange folly and vanity of such assertions as these Iunius was a wise man and yet he saw no folly nor vanity nor strangenes in a like assertion and so was Bogerman who relates it roundly and without haesitancy from him in these words Bogerm Annot in Hug Grot ex Iuni p. 225. Servus mandatum Domini sui referens ad conservum suum obligat illius conscientiam instrumentali ministerio suo at cognitioni suae aut foro suo minimè obligat Hoc nunquam Dominus quisquam daturus nunquam fervus fidelis assumpturus i. e. A servant relating the command of his Lord to his fellow servant bindeth his conscience by his instrumentall ministry that is as I conceive it so farr as he reporteth the Lords mind and command but doeth not bind him to his owne outward jurisdiction This no Lord will ever give nor any faithfull servant assume But did not they assume this and more when they would bind me to rest in that wrighting and to be accountable to them for my conformity to it not having convinced or instructed me that it was the will of our Lord that I should doe so Also Dr. Whittaker was a wise man Whitt de Concil Quest 3. Chap. 2. yet he saw no folly nor vanity nor strangenes in a like assertion For speaking of the definitions of Councills concerning matters to be beleived or to be done he sheweth that to define a thing signifieth either 1. to declare what we are to beleive doe upō the authority of the Scripture because the Scripture teacheth that it aught to be so beleived and done and that therefore they that beleive or doe otherwise are in an errour 2. or else it signifyeth to appoynt and prescribe by their owne authority what we are to beleive or doe so as men must rest in it whatsoever reason they have against it and may not beleive or doe otherwise The first he alloweth and so did I and desired nothing else but to understand some rule from the word warranting me to doe that whereunto they in
he deny Not the first unlesse he will affirme that the Classes have a greater power over particular Churches then the Apostles had Which J thinck he will not say much lesse goe about to prove Will he deny the assumption Those 4 texts of Scripture were alleadged by me for the proofe of it To prevent all mistakes I pray the Reader to be informed that my intent in alleadging these Scriptures was onely to advertise the Ministers of the Classis that they have no authority to exact this of me as a cōdition of my admittāce to that pastorall charge as my very words in that wrighting declare not to shew the unlawfullnes of my baptising any that are not members of that particular Church for I professe in expresse words after that in regard of the communion of particular Churches among themselves I neither did nor doe refuse to baptise their infants who are not members of that Church so that I may be satisfyed that they are indeed Christians So that the question is onely whether the Classis hath power to exact such a thing of any minister to be admitted to a particular Church amongst them as a condition of his admittance Jn this case I might have put them upon shewing their warrant and commission for their so doing as I now doe require of the Answerer when he shall defend his pretended answer in his next booke but to make short worke I then produced the Apostles practise whose commission was larger then any Classis hath received and shewed that they never assumed so much which they would not have fayled to doe in one place or other the necessity of the Church in those times so requiring nor to have recorded it for the instruction of posterity if they might have done it To this end I noated three places of Scripture Let us now consider them and his answer 1. Text. Acts. 20.28 Wherein Paul charged the Elders of Ephesus to take heed unto themselves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers Where he did not extend the excercising of their office farther then the Holy Ghost extēded their relation Let us examine his eight answers which he giveth rather by number then by weight His first answer is ad hominem to the man more then to the matter For he sayth By what right Mr. D. himselfe being no member of this Church did communicate with us in the Lords supper by the some right may a Pastor excercise his Ministry in some acts of it to those who are no mrmbers of his Church Reply This answer is nothing to the matter in question For 1. the question is not what I may lawfully doe but what the Classis may warrantably exact in manner aforesaid For some lawfull things are arbitrary and in our liberty and to be done sometimes and sometimes omitted as circumstances and respects vary the case and those no man may impose as necessary It had bene more to the purpose if he could have said By what right the Classis did compell him to administer the Lords supper to unknowne persons that are no members of his Church c. by the same right they may compell me to baptise the infants of those that are no members 2. The cases are not alike betweene myne admittance to communicate at the Lords table the admittance of those to baptisme concerning whom the question is For J conceive that besides my relation else where and the right which these Churches give to knowne passants of being admitted to the communion for a short time both himselfe and the wholl Church acknowledged me for a member with them for the time of my abode in that service which they testifyed by desiring the helpe of my publick labours and their chearfull admittance of me to that ordinance during that time without the least scruple Now let the Reader judge whether it be alike to receive a man so knowne and acknowledged among themselves as a member for a time to communion in the Lords supper and the baptising of those infants whose parents are members neither of that Church nor of any other for aught any man knoweth being not at all knowne unto the Church His second answer is that the Apostle might have layed upon them a further duety in some other place though no more was required in that place Reply 1. If he would have answered to the purpose he should have produced some other place wherein the Apostle did so but that he did not because he could not 2. That Paul did not impose any such injunction upon the Pastors of Ephesus at this time being to leave them nor afterwards in the Epistle which he wrote to them from Rome nor at any other time which the Scripture mentioneth and it would have bene recorded if it had bene done being a matter of such moment no where else in Scripture propounded wherefore was it but because he received no such command from the Lord Which if he had done it stood not with his faithfullnes Act 20.20 v. 27. who professeth to keepe back nothing that was proffitable and to declare all the Counsell of God to conceale 3. That neither Paul nor any of the Apostles could impose any such injunctions upon Pastors The 5. booke of the Church Chap. 27. p. 497. Cartw. 1. Repl. p. 43. I prove thus Because it had bene to confound the Apostolicall and Pastorall office to bind men to breake the limits of their office which had bene a violation of Gods order as D. Feild and Mr. Cartwright shew whom it concerneth the Answerer to answer in this point His third answer he sayth is more particular but I say it is no more to the purpose then the former He sayth The preaching of the word is a Ministeriall act which Ministers are bound to performe to some without when they invite Heathens Turkes or Iewes to heare them Pro 9.3.4.5 Mat. 28.19.20 Reply But 1 what is all this to prove that the Classis hath the authority whereof the question is Bring it into a Syllogisme and see 2. For the Assertion it selfe though I grant that the preaching of the Gospell by a Minister is an act of his ministry yet Prov 9.2.3.4 Mat. 11.19 Dan 12.3 it is not so in every man For one that is not one of wisdoms maydens by vertue of office yet may be one of wisdoms children whom God may blesse in the excercise of the gifts and graces of his spirit to be an instrument of turning many to righteousnes And for that other place in Mat. 28.19.20 I know not to what purpose it is alleadged unlesse to shew that the Classis may give ordinary Pastors such a commission as Christ gave the Apostles to goe and preach the Gospell to all Nations 3. To what end doeth he speake of preaching the Gospell to Heathens Iewes and Turkes in this question Is it to intimate that Baptisme may be as lawfully administred to the infants
to be done therefore he erreth who holdeth that the Classis may not exact it after that manner 2. he sayth It is vayne to call in question whether they be Christians who are members of a true Church But is not this a vayne answer For how shall I know them to be members of a true Church who are otherwise altogether unknowne without questioning with them about it And as vayne is his third answer For therefore doe I require a precedent examination of the members of another Church and not of the members of his Church Because my relation to that place would have made the members of that Church knowne to me without such examination but not strangers who are altogether unknowne 4. He sayth particular persons members of the Catholick or Vniversall Church may also have their infants baptised though not joyned to a particular visible Church Reply 1. How doeth this serve to prove that J plainely refute my selfe For how can a man be said to refute what he said concerning the members of a particular Church by saying nothing about the members of the Catholick Church Doe men use to refute by silence or by saying nothing I wish he had so refuted the printed pamphlet for his owne credit and peace that men might have thought he could have said something in his owne defence more then it now appeares he can 2. For the matter of his answer When he shall answer me what he meaneth by the Catholick Church whether it be a visible or an invisible Church of which he speaketh shall give a character or description whereby a man that refuseth to joyne with any particular visible Church may be knowne to be a member of that visible or invisible Catholick Church then I shall have a fit occasion to tell the reason of my mentioning onely the Communion of particular Churches in this question 5. He sayth that I having resigned up my Pastorall charge in London and not now established minister of any particular Congregation doe yet upon occasion preach for Mr Balmford and Mr. Peters c. he would know upon what ground I administer the word to them Reply 1. What ever the ground be it will helpe him nothing at all to prove that I have refuted my selfe in what I said concerning the power of the Classis in this case 2. Seeing I must give my account take it in few words I have preached for these men upon the same ground whereupon I preached for him almost six moneths together not by appoyntment of the Classis nor by vertue of office among them but with the consent and intreaty of such as have authority to dispose and governe such actions I have bene willing and ready to imploy my talents and excercise my gifts for the good of many according to the rule 1. Pet. 4.10.11 Now I demand wherein I have refuted my selfe To wind up all these extravagancies like so many odd and broken ends together into one bottom My demand to the Classis in reference to their practise was by what right the Pastor of a particular Church must be bound to performe a worke of his ministry to those that are not members of his Church seing the Apostles never exacted required or persuaded it To this question the Answerer pretendeth to make eight answeres which must be thus expressed or else they are not to the question 1. The Classis may exact this of any Minister by the same right that Mr. D. had to come to the Sacrament in that Church whereof he was not a member 2. By the same right whereby the Apostles required as much for aught we know for we cannot find it written 3. By the same right whereby Ministers are bound to labour the conversion of those without 4. By the same right whereby Pastors may administer the Lords supper to the members of other Churches 5. By the same right whereby the Church of Ierusalem afforded helpe in a difficult case to the Church at Antioch being desired so to doe 6. By the same right whereby Pastors must labour to increase their flock 7. By the same right whereby ministers may helpe a neighbour Church to convince erronious persons 8. Because Mr. D. is willing to baptise those infants being brought to him whose parents are neither of them members of any true Church Is not this question soundly answered Or take my interrogation for a strong deniall of their power to bind me to this condition of baptising those who are not members of the Church committed to me as indeed it was in my intent This deniall of their power he accounteth myne errour and he goeth about to confute it by eight Arguments which must be thus framed to conclude the question 1. Arg. Mr. D. did communicate with us in the Lords supper being no member of our Church Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to baptise those that are not members of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 2. Arg. Though the Apostle required no more of the Pastors of Ephesus but to feede their owne flock yet he might lay some further duety upon them elsewhere Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to baptise those that are not members of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 3. Arg. Ministers are bound to preach the word for the conversion of those that are without Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to execute his ministry to those that are not of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 4. Arg. Pastors must administer the Sacraments of Baptisme and the Lords supper in neighbour Churches that are destitute being required thereunto Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to execute his ministry to those that are not of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 5. Arg. The Church at Ierusalem helped the Church at Antioch in a difficult question Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to execute his ministry to those that are not of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 6. Arg Pastors attend their flock by labouring to increase it and to bring others into the fold Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to execute his ministry to those that are not of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 7. Arg. Ministers being desired may lawfully assist neighbour Churches in convincing erronious persons Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to execute his ministry to those that are not of his Church Reply I deny the Argument 8. Arg Mr. Davenport is willing to baptise the infants that are brought whose parents are members of any true Church Therefore the Classis may bind a Pastor to performe some worke of his ministry to those that are not of his Church Reply I deny the Argument Againe if I would multiply questions which I am unwilling to doe J could shew in the same manner how litle or nothing he hath said to prove the very thing which he pretendeth to prove to witt that it is the duety of a Pastor to discharge some
Mat. 5.37 yea is a rule for prevention of unlawfull oathes in ordinary discourse not for a tryall of mens being in Covenant 2. when Christ asked the blind men that came unto him for cure Mat. 9.28 Beleive yee that I am able to doe this In them yea was a sufficient answer in that case 1. Because it was joyned with suitable actions as their following him crying to him and saying Vers 27. Thou sonne of David have mercy upon us vers 27. Wherein they continued following him into the house 2. Which Christ accounted sufficient who knew what was in man and witnessed that they did inwardly beleive according to that profession in curing them after he had said according to your faith be it unto you vers 29.30 V. 29.30 To apply this I grant that the word yea is sufficient to testifye their being in Covenant at the time of administring the Sacrament who are sufficiently knowne by other tryalls to have true faith but what is this to those who are altogether unknowne For the 3. Where our Saviour Christ after he had opened diverse parables asked the Disciples Have yee vnderstood all these things They said vnto him Mat. 13.51 yea Lord. Here is no speech about their being in the Covenant What is this to the matter in question For it is not denyed that by saying yea men have testifyed their fayth sufficiently if their faith hath made it selfe otherwise knowne as it did in the Disciples but it is denyed to be a sufficient testification of faith in persons who are otherwise altogether unknowne The same answer may be given to that place in the fourth text where to Christ demanding Peter lovest thou me Ioh. 21.15 Peter answered yea Lord thou knowest that I love thee And Christ did know it by his weeping bitterly for his denyall of him and by the inward impression which he left upon Peters heart by his divine power when he looked upon him in the high Preists hall and before And so to Christ it was sufficient to say yea Lord and to referr himselfe to his knowledge of him But will it thence follow that it is sufficient for us if any one shall say so These are the places which he noateth for the use of the word yea and the Reader may see how litle to the purpose The same answers may serve to his other texts concerning Amen which are needlesly produced and serve not at all to prove the thing in question As for his other proofes taken from short expressions as in making of Covenants All that the Lord hath spoken we will doe or the like I marvayled much that the Answerer alleadged those which make wholly against him For 1. there is a great deale of binding force in this expression which is in no sort answered by the word yea 2. it was made by a people whom God had chosen out from all the world to be his peculiar ones upon experience of the admirable passages of his fatherly providence and upon their acquaintance with his wayes unto whom the people against whom I have excepted are in no sense to be compared 3. If the proofe which himselfe alleadgeth out of Iosh 24.15.16 c. be well examined Iosh 24.15.16.17 18.19.20 21.22.23 24.25 it will be found that they not onely understood the Covenant whereunto they bound themselves in those short answers but also the Covenant was propounded their assent to it required in another manner with more vehemency then a mere once declaring of it on Gods part or one short answer on their part seemeth to carry with it Secondly To prove that nodding with the head or some gesture of the body is a sufficient testification of a mans being in the Covenant so farr as to procure the admission of his child to baptisme he searched out the use of the latine and greeke words which serve to expresse that gesture and are used to shew the consent or dissent of the will in any matter But to what purpose I know not For it is not doubted that such words and gestures doe signifye the consent of the will nor that they are used in the worshipping of God nor that solemne covenants and professions of speciall persons in the Church are so expressed as the stipulation of ministers Elders and Deacons received into office and the profession of publick repentance before the Congregation are accomplished with saying yea and some gesture of body But will all this prove the point in question Surely no. For 1. the persons in the forenamed cases are members of the Church or sufficiently knowne to the Church but these are neither of that Church nor of any other or not knowne to be such otherwise those expressions would not be judged sufficient in a doubtfull case 2. they know and understand what is propounded to them and whereunto they give such a testification of assent which many of those of whom the question is doe not 3. the profession in those cases is made by the partyes themselves but in this by any nurse or other person in the parents absence yet those also are as unknowne as the parents yea such parents and sureties are so farr from being knowne to be beleivers that they are many of them notoriously knowne to live as without God in the world in all loosenes and profanenes In his third Answer he sayeth he cometh more particularly unto the places of Scripture alleadged by me I wish he may be found to doe so in the issue that we may find some ground for fayth to rest upon 1. For the first text Acts. 11.21.26 It is not professed by what words or signes they professed their faith conversion to God How can it be proved from hence that such as said yea and bowed their heads bodies in testimony of their approbation and liking thereof might not thereupon be admitted to baptisme and their infants Reply 1. It is enough that they satisfyed the Apostles that they beleived and turned to the Lord and that they did so in truth appeareth by the testimony which the Holy Ghost giveth them in that place It matters not by what words or signes more or lesse it was done but had there bene no more done then saying yea or nodding the head by persons otherwise altogether unknowne it would not have satisfyed 1. Because fayth and conversion to God doe appeare where they are in more and better fruits and evidences then those as himselfe I beleive would manifest if he were to handle that text 2. Because more reverent and religious respect was had in those times to the seales of the Covenant then to pollute them by such a promiscuous dispensing them as is used in Amsterdam 2. But what an unreasonable demand is that How can it be proved hence c For 1. I deny that such a saying of yea can be proved in the Apostles times to be a sufficient evidence of ones being a Christian and alleadge this